Sorry, I added a final clause after you posted.

Regardless of when, why or how the land was sold and whatever purpose was stated or not stated, public policy must take precedence. The land is not in the Hol Chan reserve, at least I don't think it is, but it does border it. In other countries such as the UK and US a protected reserve can and often does include privately owned land. That land can then be freely used by its owner so long as certain lines aren't crossed. Seems to me eminently sensible.

If you aren't here, why don't you write to Mito Paz and ask him for his views and his reasons for holding them? His is one of the most authoritative voices here.