3 ms·
> I would think giving it to some federal parks/wildlife agency would come with stronger protections than an NGO could provide. This largely depends on whether
by jen20 4y ago
> I would think giving it to some federal parks/wildlife agency would come with stronger protections than an NGO could provide.
This largely depends on whether an NGO is more trustworthy than the party in control of the federal government when it comes to conservation. Half the time, the answer seems to be "yes".
- throwaway894345 4y agoTo be clear, my intended implication wasn't "NGOs are untrustworthy", but rather that "the federal government is a lot more likely to be around in 50 years than an NGO". I was also assuming that donating the lands to a federal program implied that the federal government couldn't just turn around and sell the land a few years later, although that might be naive on my part.