Mitigation banking

Last updated

Mitigation banking is a market-based system of debits and credits (used primarily in the United States as part of its "no net loss" policy) that involves restoration, creation, or enhancement of wetlands to compensate for unavoidable impacts to a wetland in another location. [1] It involves a system of mitigation banks, sites where projects to restore, create, or enhance wetlands can be carried out in advance of impacts. The outcomes of these projects are valued through the creation of compensatory mitigation credits that can be purchased from mitigation banks to offset the negative impacts of developments or agriculture expansion on wetlands and aquatic habitats. [2] This process is generally conducted with the aim of achieving no net loss of function and value for specific aquatic habitats, such as in terms of the biodiversity or ecosystem services provided by a wetland. [3]

Contents

Mitigation banking is a form of biodiversity banking, and a mechanism to conduct biodiversity offsetting (described by the term "compensatory mitigation" in the United States). Mitigation banking was developed in the United States with the aim of conserving wetlands (while still allowing development) by working towards a goal of "no net loss of wetlands", developing from compensatory mitigation policies under section 404 of the Clean Water Act. [4] Since then, the concept has expanded beyond the United States and, from mitigation banking, various other forms of biodiversity banking evolved, including conservation banking and habitat banking. [5]

Fox Creek near St. Louis, Missouri, the site of the first stream mitigation bank in the United States approved by the US Army Corps of Engineers in 2000. Fox Creek east of Champion, Missouri, USA.jpg
Fox Creek near St. Louis, Missouri, the site of the first stream mitigation bank in the United States approved by the US Army Corps of Engineers in 2000.

The public interest is served when enforcement agencies require more habitat as mitigation, often referred to as a mitigation ratio, than is adversely impacted by management or development of nearby acreage. [7] Wetland Mitigation Credits do not convey any interest in the real estate that hosts the mitigation bank. Wetland Credits are treated, for accounting purposes, as intangible personal property.

Terminology

Mitigation banking is defined by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (a US government agency) as "restoration, creation or enhancement of wetlands for the purpose of compensating for manipulated wetlands at another location". [8]

This system uses mitigation banks - wetland areas that have been restored, established, enhanced, or preserved away from the site of impacts and set aside to compensate for future damage to wetlands. [9] Banks can be created by bank sponsors (such as government agencies, corporations, non-profits) by making a formal agreement with the US Army Corps of Engineers that describes the plan for restoring the site and the number of credits it is expected to generate. The functions of the bank or the acres that have been restored within its "service area" (its geographical location) are quantified to determine the value of the credits sold by the bank. [8]

Where a wetland is described as "manipulated", this might mean that it has been drained, dredged, filled, levelled, or altered in some other way to allow agriculture or development to take place on the site. [8] If manipulation of wetlands results in unavoidable adverse impacts, compensatory mitigation measures are used to offset these impacts. Unavoidable adverse impacts are negative effects on wetlands that cannot reasonably be avoided or minimised, therefore requiring compensatory mitigation. The mitigation sequence is used as a tool to guide the type and level of compensatory mitigation that will be required under the Clean Water Act. [10] It includes the steps avoid, minimise, and compensate, requiring that avoidance and minimisation measures should be exercised before compensation. [10] The term mitigation hierarchy may also be used and its framework has been expanded. [11]

Compensatory mitigation includes measures to restore, create, enhance, and preserve wetlands to offset unavoidable adverse impacts. [12] It is a form of environmental mitigation and can include both on-site (on or adjacent to the site of impacts) and off-site mitigation. The measures that come under compensatory mitigation and conducted as part of mitigation banking are defined by the EPA as: [13]

Mitigation banking is one of three main mechanisms used in the United States to carry out compensatory mitigation, in addition to in-lieu fee mitigation and permittee-responsible mitigation. [13]

Mitigation banking in the US

Policies

In the United States, federal agencies (under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA)), as well as many state and local governments, require compensatory mitigation (described as biodiversity offsetting in other countries) for the disturbance or destruction of wetland, stream, or endangered species habitat. [14]

Under the CWA, a permit is required for certain activities that impact wetlands and other aquatic habitats. To receive the permit, applicants might be required to compensate for the environmental impacts of their proposed activities, including by purchasing credits from a mitigation bank. Mitigation banking is administered and regulated by the US Environmental Protection Agency and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). [15]

The USEPA identifies four components of a mitigation bank: the bank site, the bank instrument, the Interagency Review Team (IRT), and the service area. [1]

A policy of "no net loss" of habitat value and function has been used as the objective for mitigation banking in the United States since the 1990s. [18] This means that where impacts are caused, they should be compensated for using environmental mitigation measures like mitigation banking so that there is no overall loss in the value or function of wetland habitats. There have been challenges to implementing and monitoring this policy. In some cases, wetland mitigation programs have been approved based on total area rather than in terms of equivalence of ecological function. [19] [20] In addition, where mitigation banks are located far from the site of impact, rather than in the same watershed as the impact, it may be difficult or impossible to retain original value and function. [15]

Mitigation credits

Mitigation banks are valued in terms of "compensatory mitigation credits". The number of credits available for sale by a given mitigation bank is set out in the bank instrument and determined using an ecological assessment. These credits can then be purchased as a way for individuals or entities to compensate for negative impacts that cannot otherwise be avoided or minimised.

A mitigation bank generates credits for the amount and quality of habitat the bank site improves. [21] Credits are units of exchange defined as the ecological value associated with converting a naturally occurring wetland or other specific habitat type, for economic purposes.

Mitigation credits to compensate for impacts to river banks (described as riparian impacts) may be assigned in relation to the linear distance of a stream functioning at the highest possible capacity within the watershed of the bank. Mitigation credits are determined based on bank acreage, functional units, and other assessments.

The estimated potential number of credits a bank may earn can vary based on ecological performance of the bank. The Interagency Review Team periodically releases bank credits as the bank meets certain performance milestones. This happens over the course of the "establishment period", which lasts around 10 to 12 years. When the IRT releases potential bank credits, they become available credits meaning they can be purchased for ecological offset. [17]

Credits are designated by an interagency Mitigation Bank Review Team (MBRT). [22] The MBRT evaluates and permits a proposed mitigation bank. [23] They also determine the number of potential mitigation credits a bank may earn and sell. The MBRT may include representatives of various federal, state and/or local government agencies, including: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, National Marine Fisheries Service, Environmental Protection Agency, US Fish and Wildlife Service, State Environmental Protection Divisions, Local Water Management Districts, County Environmental Departments and the Soil Conservation Service. [24]

The RIBITS (Regulatory In lieu fee and Bank Information Tracking System) website was created by the USACE to provide information on mitigation and conservation banks and in-lieu fee (ILF) program sites. [25] RIBITS contains local and national policies and procedures for mitigation banking. It houses information about all mitigation banks and ILF sites including site documents, mitigation credit availability, and service areas as well as tracks all credit transactions. [26]

Mitigation banking beyond the US

The mitigation banking concept has been extended to develop other forms of biodiversity banking that are applied outside of the United States as a mechanism for biodiversity offsetting. [18] For example, mitigation banking has been used to inform and shape biodiversity banking frameworks in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Colombia, and Brazil.

Biodiversity banking is an umbrella term that encompasses a range of market-based systems for offsetting, including mitigation banking, conservation banking, habitat banking, and species banking. [27] Biodiversity banking describes a market-based framework for biodiversity offsetting where offsets can be traded in the form of credits to offset negative environmental impacts of development projects or activities. [28] [18]

History

Origins

Compensatory mitigation was developed in the United States with the aim of balancing the demand for economic development with the need to conserve wetlands. [29] This began with the Clean Water Act (CWA) in 1972. [30] Under Section 404 of the CWA, a permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers is required to conduct certain activities that may impact wetlands. The developer must submit a Public Notice to their respective district of the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) requesting to carry out a project and associated ecological impacts on a wetland.

Mitigation banking was developed in the United States in the 1980s as a new method for compensatory mitigation with a market-oriented, off-site approach. [31] Guidance from the US Fish and Wildlife Service in 1983 led to the establishment of the first wetland mitigation banks in the early 1980s. [32] The practice began as a way for state highway and public works departments to comply with regulations for wetland mitigation, and later entrepreneurial banks were set up to sell credits to public and private developers. [33] For example, the Fina La Terre in Louisiana, signed off in 1984 and proposed by a private company, was one of the first mitigation banks in the country. [34]

The Corps initially preferred on-site mitigation to preserve the wetland functions at their location. Unfortunately, this approach had a low long-term success rate. [18] A 1993 Memorandum of Agreement gave national guidance on mitigation banking by instead supporting a market-oriented method. It supported off-site wetland mitigation in which a permittee purchases mitigation credits from a third-party mitigation bank. This entity, private, governmental, or non-governmental, promotes the no-net-loss policy by restoring or creating an area of wetland into a mitigation bank and selling compensatory mitigation credits to permittees.

Development since the 1990s

In 1995, federal guidance governing the establishment, use and operation of mitigation banks was issued by several government agencies, including USACE, EPA, NRCS, USFWS, and NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) Fisheries. This guidance defined mitigation banks and their objectives, enabling the use of mitigation banking for compensatory mitigation to meet the goal of "no net loss" of wetlands. [35]

The application of mitigation banking has been expanded beyond wetlands to include streams and other aquatic habitats. [36] This led to the creation of the first stream mitigation bank in Fox Creek, Missouri in 2000. [37] The concept has also been expanded to develop other forms of biodiversity banking, including conservation banking for endangered species in California and habitat banking in other countries. By 2000, there were over 230 private mitigation banks and 180 state-run mitigation banks. [38] By 2001, 23 states had statutes or regulations authorising the use of mitigation banks and a further 8 had issued guidelines to govern mitigation banking. [39]

In 2008, the regulations for compensatory mitigation (which includes mitigation banking) were revised by the USACE and USEPA under the 'Compensatory Mitigation Rule'. These new federal regulations established mitigation banks as the preferred method for compensatory mitigation and also introduced ecosystem services into the standards for mitigation banking. [40]

By 2024, more than 1200 mitigation banks had been approved and were operating in the United States with a total of 750,000 credits approved across the country. [41] However, state and regional studies on wetland compensatory mitigation suggest that a significant portion of compensation sites are failing to meet administrative and ecological performance standards, according to the Environmental Law Institute. [42]

Conservation easements

In the United States, for land to be used for mitigation banking, a commitment to protecting these lands must be made using a legal agreement called a conservation easement. [43] This is a voluntary legal arrangement between a landowner and a government agency or conservation organisation to restrict future commercial or residential development on a site, permanently setting it aside to be managed for conservation purposes. [44] [45] This may include a dedicated trust fund to finance the continued long-term management of the site for mitigation banking.

The Internal Revenue Service (a US federal revenue agency) has viewed the filing of a perpetual conservation easement in return for mitigation credits as a sale or exchange of property under section 1001 for federal income tax purposes. [46]

Monitoring and enforcement are required to make sure that the terms of the conservation easement are maintained and long-term investment into conservation continues in perpetuity. [47] Despite this, concerns remain over successfully monitoring and enforcing these agreements in practice. [48]

Setting aside land for mitigation banking in perpetuity might be regarded as a disadvantage for landowners, who may want to use the land in different ways for their own needs in the future (such as for agriculture or development) or may face a reduction in the value of their land. [49] On the other hand, using a conservation easement to permanently set aside the site of a mitigation bank might be regarded as beneficial for the achievement of broader goals for biodiversity conservation and in preventing future damage to wetland habitats and their biodiversity.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clean Water Act</span> 1972 U.S. federal law regulating water pollution

The Clean Water Act (CWA) is the primary federal law in the United States governing water pollution. Its objective is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters; recognizing the responsibilities of the states in addressing pollution and providing assistance to states to do so, including funding for publicly owned treatment works for the improvement of wastewater treatment; and maintaining the integrity of wetlands.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Land development</span> Landscape alteration

Land development is the alteration of landscape in any number of ways such as:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ecosystem service</span> Benefits provided by intact ecosystems

Ecosystem services are the various benefits that humans derive from healthy ecosystems. These ecosystems, when functioning well, offer such things as provision of food, natural pollination of crops, clean air and water, decomposition of wastes, or flood control. Ecosystem services are grouped into four broad categories of services. There are provisioning services, such as the production of food and water. Regulating services, such as the control of climate and disease. Supporting services, such as nutrient cycles and oxygen production. And finally there are cultural services, such as spiritual and recreational benefits. Evaluations of ecosystem services may include assigning an economic value to them.

Environmental mitigation refers to the process by which measures to avoid, minimise, or compensate for adverse impacts on the environment are applied. In the context of planning processes like Environmental Impact Assessments, this process is often guided by applying conceptual frameworks like the "mitigation hierarchy" or "mitigation sequence". This generally includes the steps avoid, reduce, restore, and offset. In some countries, environmental mitigation measures, including biodiversity offsetting, may be required by law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Biodiversity action plan</span>

A biodiversity action plan (BAP) is an internationally recognized program addressing threatened species and habitats and is designed to protect and restore biological systems. The original impetus for these plans derives from the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). As of 2009, 191 countries have ratified the CBD, but only a fraction of these have developed substantive BAP documents.

Ecosystem Marketplace, an initiative of Forest Trends, is a non-profit organization based in Washington, DC, that focuses on increasing transparency and providing information for ecosystem services and payment schemes.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Payment for ecosystem services</span>

Payments for ecosystem services (PES), also known as payments for environmental services, are incentives offered to farmers or landowners in exchange for managing their land to provide some sort of ecological service. They have been defined as "a transparent system for the additional provision of environmental services through conditional payments to voluntary providers". These programmes promote the conservation of natural resources in the marketplace.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wetland conservation</span> Conservation of wet areas

Wetland conservation is aimed at protecting and preserving areas of land including marshes, swamps, bogs, and fens that are covered by water seasonally or permanently due to a variety of threats from both natural and anthropogenic hazards. Some examples of these hazards include habitat loss, pollution, and invasive species. Wetland vary widely in their salinity levels, climate zones, and surrounding geography and play a crucial role in maintaining biodiversity, ecosystem services, and support human communities. Wetlands cover at least six percent of the Earth and have become a focal issue for conservation due to the ecosystem services they provide. More than three billion people, around half the world's population, obtain their basic water needs from inland freshwater wetlands. They provide essential habitats for fish and various wildlife species, playing a vital role in purifying polluted waters and mitigating the damaging effects of floods and storms. Furthermore, they offer a diverse range of recreational activities, including fishing, hunting, photography, and wildlife observation.

Biodiversity banking, also known as biodiversity trading, conservation banking, mitigation banking, habitat banking, compensatory habitat, or set-asides, describes a market-based framework for biodiversity offsetting where offsets can be traded in the form of credits to offset negative environmental impacts of development projects or activities. This involves biodiversity banks, areas with biodiversity value. On the site of a biodiversity bank, conservation activities may be carried out to preserve, restore, enhance, or conserve biodiversity. The outcomes of projects carried out at biodiversity banks are valued in the form of credits, which can be purchased as a way to offset unavoidable adverse environmental impacts, often with the aim of achieving no net loss of biodiversity.

Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 531 U.S. 159 (2001), was a decision by the US Supreme Court that interpreted a provision of the Clean Water Act. Section 404 of the Act requires permits for the discharge of dredged or fill materials into "navigable waters," which is defined by the Act as "waters of the United States." That provision was the basis for the federal wetlands-permitting program.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nutrient pollution</span> Contamination of water by excessive inputs of nutrients

Nutrient pollution, a form of water pollution, refers to contamination by excessive inputs of nutrients. It is a primary cause of eutrophication of surface waters, in which excess nutrients, usually nitrogen or phosphorus, stimulate algal growth. Sources of nutrient pollution include surface runoff from farm fields and pastures, discharges from septic tanks and feedlots, and emissions from combustion. Raw sewage is a large contributor to cultural eutrophication since sewage is high in nutrients. Releasing raw sewage into a large water body is referred to as sewage dumping, and still occurs all over the world. Excess reactive nitrogen compounds in the environment are associated with many large-scale environmental concerns. These include eutrophication of surface waters, harmful algal blooms, hypoxia, acid rain, nitrogen saturation in forests, and climate change.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">No net loss wetlands policy</span> Environmental policy goal for wetland conservation in the United States

"No net loss" is the United States government's overall policy goal regarding wetlands preservation. The goal of the policy is to balance wetland loss due to economic development with wetlands reclamation, mitigation, and restorations efforts, so that the total acreage of wetlands in the country does not decrease, but remains constant or increases.

<i>The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity</i> Study

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) was a study led by Pavan Sukhdev from 2007 to 2011. It is an international initiative to draw attention to the global economic benefits of biodiversity. Its objective is to highlight the growing cost of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation and to draw together expertise from the fields of science, economics and policy to enable practical actions. TEEB aims to assess, communicate and mainstream the urgency of actions through its five deliverables—D0: science and economic foundations, policy costs and costs of inaction, D1: policy opportunities for national and international policy-makers, D2: decision support for local administrators, D3: business risks, opportunities and metrics and D4: citizen and consumer ownership.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Biodiversity offsetting</span> System to mitigation negative development impacts

Biodiversity offsetting is a system used predominantly by planning authorities and developers to fully compensate for biodiversity impacts associated with economic development, through the planning process. In some circumstances, biodiversity offsets are designed to result in an overall biodiversity gain. Offsetting is generally considered the final stage in a mitigation hierarchy, whereby predicted biodiversity impacts must first be avoided, minimised and reversed by developers, before any remaining impacts are offset. The mitigation hierarchy serves to meet the environmental policy principle of "No Net Loss" of biodiversity alongside development.

The Lacassane Company is a land management company, with a goal of sustainable land management using an environmental management scheme that involves a host of tools including holistic management. Located primarily in Jefferson Davis and Cameron parish, with property in Ragley, Louisiana, the company headquarters is in Lake Charles, Louisiana.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clean Water Rule</span> 2015 EPA regulation

The Clean Water Rule is a 2015 regulation published by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to clarify water resource management in the United States under a provision of the Clean Water Act of 1972. The regulation defined the scope of federal water protection in a more consistent manner, particularly over streams and wetlands which have a significant hydrological and ecological connection to traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, and territorial seas. It is also referred to as the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule, which defines all bodies of water that fall under U.S. federal jurisdiction. The rule was published in response to concerns about lack of clarity over the act's scope from legislators at multiple levels, industry members, researchers and other science professionals, activists, and citizens.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conservation banking</span>

Conservation banking is an environmental market-based method designed to offset adverse effects, generally, to species of concern, are threatened, or endangered and protected under the United States Endangered Species Act (ESA) through the creation of conservation banks. Conservation banking can be viewed as a method of mitigation that allows permitting agencies to target various natural resources typically of value or concern, and it is generally contemplated as a protection technique to be implemented before the valued resource or species will need to be mitigated. The ESA prohibits the "taking" of fish and wildlife species which are officially listed as endangered or threatened in their populations. However, under section 7(a)(2) for Federal Agencies, and under section 10(a) for private parties, a take may be permissible for unavoidable impacts if there are conservation mitigation measures for the affected species or habitat. Purchasing “credits” through a conservation bank is one such mitigation measure to remedy the loss.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Disney Wilderness Preserve</span> Wilderness preserve in Florida

The Disney Wilderness Preserve is a 11,500-acre nature reserve near Kissimmee, Florida. It was created through an agreement between The Walt Disney Company, The Nature Conservancy, and the state of Florida. It is located fifteen miles south of Walt Disney World.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wetlands and wetland policies in Canada</span>

Canadian wetlands account for approximately one quarter of the world's total wetlands and is ranked with the highest surface area of wetlands on the Ramsar Conventions List of Wetlands of International Importance. Canada holds 37 designated areas of International Importance which equates to approximately 13,086,767 hectares of land.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Solar landfill</span> Landfill site converted into a solar power station

A solar landfill, also referred to as a brightfield, is a former landfill site that has been transformed into a solar array or solar farm. Landfills that are no longer in use are often called brownfields due to potential environmental concerns. By repurposing these brownfields into solar fields, they then become brightfields. In the United States, there are more than 10,000 closed or inactive landfills. These have the potential to accommodate over 60 gigawatts of solar installations.

References

  1. 1 2 Environmental Protection Agency, United States (2024-06-28). "Mitigation banks under CWA section 404". EPA. Retrieved 2024-07-31.
  2. ↑ Environmental Protection Agency, United States (2008). "Compensatory Mitigation Rule Factsheet" (PDF). epa.gov. Retrieved 2024-07-30.
  3. ↑ "Background on Compensatory Mitigation | Environmental Law Institute". www.eli.org. Retrieved 2024-07-31.
  4. ↑ "Mitigation Trade: Making Up for Environmental Harm". Investopedia. Retrieved 2024-07-31.
  5. ↑ Froger, Géraldine; Ménard, Sophie; Méral, Philippe (2015). "Towards a comparative and critical analysis of biodiversity banks". Ecosystem Services. 15: 152–161. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.11.018. ISSN   2212-0416.
  6. ↑ Harding, Scott D. (2001-09-28). "Fox Creek Mitigation Bank". Wetlands Engineering & River Restoration 2001. American Society of Civil Engineers: 1–10. doi:10.1061/40581(2001)25. ISBN   978-0-7844-0581-9.
  7. ↑ "Mitigation Ratio Calculator | Ecosystem Based Management Tools". www.ebmtools.org. Archived from the original on 2013-01-25.
  8. 1 2 3 Natural Resources Conservation Service, US Department of Agriculture (2024-07-29). "Conservation Compliance Glossary". National Resources Conservation Service, USDA. Retrieved 2024-07-27.
  9. ↑ Environmental Protection Agency, United States (2024-06-28). "Mitigation banks under CWA section 404". EPA. Retrieved 2024-07-31.
  10. 1 2 OECD (2016). Biodiversity Offsets: Effective Design and Implementation. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. doi:10.1787/9789264222519-en.
  11. ↑ "Understanding the Mitigation Hierarchy". www.joesblooms.com. Retrieved 2024-07-31.
  12. ↑ "Wetland Mitigation". The Wetland Conservancy. Retrieved 2024-07-30.
  13. 1 2 Environmental Protection Agency, United States (2008). "Compensatory Mitigation Rule Factsheet" (PDF). epa.gov. Retrieved 2024-07-30.
  14. ↑ "Background on Compensatory Mitigation | Environmental Law Institute". www.eli.org. Retrieved 2024-08-07.
  15. 1 2 3 Jhawar, Vikram. "Understanding the Basics of Mitigation Banking". Investopedia. Retrieved December 1, 2018.
  16. ↑ "Mitigation Banks". www.nae.usace.army.mil. Retrieved 2024-08-07.
  17. 1 2 Washington State Department of Ecology, Interagency Review Team. "Credit Guide for Wetland Mitigation Banks" (PDF). Access Washington. Retrieved December 2, 2018.
  18. 1 2 3 4 Bayon, Ricardo; Fox, Jessica; Carroll, Nathaniel, eds. (2009). Conservation and biodiversity banking: a guide to setting up and running biodiversity credit trading systems. London Sterling, VA: Earthscan. ISBN   978-1-84407-814-1.
  19. ↑ Enrivronmental & Natural Resource Economics 8th edition. Tom Tietenberg, Lynne Lewis. 2009 Pearson Education
  20. ↑ "Wetlands Mitigation Banking". www.epa.gov. Archived from the original on 1999-11-05.
  21. ↑ "The Mitigation Banking Group | Leading Provider of Mitigation Credits in Florida". The Mitigation Banking Group. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  22. ↑ "Mitigation Banks under CWA Section 404". 16 June 2015.
  23. ↑ "Mitigation Banking Guide". Tellurium Partners. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  24. ↑ EPA (2024-08-09). "Wetland Banking at Former Mine Lands: An Ecological Solution with Economic Benefits" (PDF). semspubepa. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  25. ↑ "Construction Industry Compliance Assistance - CICA Center". www.cicacenter.org. Retrieved 2024-08-09.
  26. ↑ "About RIBITS". RIBITS. Retrieved December 2, 2018.
  27. ↑ Froger, Géraldine; Ménard, Sophie; Méral, Philippe (2015). "Towards a comparative and critical analysis of biodiversity banks". Ecosystem Services. 15: 152–161. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.11.018. ISSN   2212-0416.
  28. ↑ "A Guide to Biodiversity Banking | Ecology by Design". | Ecology by Design. 2022-01-10. Retrieved 2024-07-30.
  29. ↑ J.B. Ruhl and James Salzman, No Net Loss? The Past, Present, and Future of Wetlands Mitigation Banking, 73 Case W. Rsrv. L. Rev. 411 (2022)
  30. ↑ Hough, Palmer; Robertson, Morgan (2009-02-01). "Mitigation under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act: where it comes from, what it means". Wetlands Ecology and Management. 17 (1): 15–33. doi:10.1007/s11273-008-9093-7. ISSN   1572-9834.
  31. ↑ J.B. Ruhl and James Salzman, No Net Loss? The Past, Present, and Future of Wetlands Mitigation Banking, 73 Case W. Rsrv. L. Rev. 411 (2022)
  32. ↑ US EPA, OW (2015-06-16). "Mitigation Banks under CWA Section 404". www.epa.gov. Retrieved 2024-08-05.
  33. ↑ Ruhl, J. J., Salzman, J., & Goodman, I. (2009). Implementing the new ecosystem services mandate of the section 404 compensatory mitigation program a catalyst for advancing science and policy. Stetson Law Review, 38(2), 251-272.
  34. ↑ Tyrna, Abbey Anne, "Wetland mitigation banks and the no-net-loss requirement: an evaluation of the Section 404 permit program in southeast Louisiana" (2008). LSU Master's Theses. 3116. https://repository.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/3116
  35. ↑ Kathrin Ellen Yates, Wetlands Mitigation and Mitigation Banking in Louisiana, 59 La. L. Rev. (1999) https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/lalrev/vol59/iss2/10
  36. ↑ "Stream Mitigation Banking". Ecosystem Marketplace. Retrieved 2024-08-05.
  37. ↑ Harding, Scott D. (2001-09-28). "Fox Creek Mitigation Bank". Wetlands Engineering and River Restoration 2001. American Society of Civil Engineers: 1–10. doi:10.1061/40581(2001)25. ISBN   978-0-7844-0581-9.
  38. ↑ Bondes & Pompe, Matthew and Jeffrey (March 11, 2004). "Calculating Wetland Mitigation Credits: Adjusting for Wetland Function and Location" (PDF). Retrieved December 1, 2018.
  39. ↑ Environmental Law Institute (2002). "Banks and Fees: The Status of Off-site Wetland Mitigation in the United States" (PDF). Environmental Law Institute. Retrieved 2024-08-05.
  40. ↑ Hough, Palmer, and Rachel Harrington. "Ten years of the compensatory mitigation rule: reflections on progress and opportunities." Envtl. L. Rep. News & Analysis 49 (2019): 10018.
  41. ↑ "The Basics of Mitigation Banking | EASI" . Retrieved 2024-08-05.
  42. ↑ "Ecological Effectiveness of Compensatory Mitigation | Environmental Law Institute". www.eli.org. Retrieved 2024-08-05.
  43. ↑ "Mitigation Banking 101: How Does Mitigation Banking Work?". The Mitigation Banking Group. 2022-11-01. Retrieved 2024-08-06.
  44. ↑ "conservation easement | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service". www.fws.gov. Retrieved 2024-08-06.
  45. ↑ "What is a Conservation Easement? – National Conservation Easement Database | NCED" . Retrieved 2024-08-06.
  46. ↑ IRS PLR 201222004 released 6/1/2012
  47. ↑ "Mitigation Banks". Freshwater Land Trust. Retrieved 2024-08-06.
  48. ↑ Jessica Owley, Preservation Is a Flawed Mitigation Strategy, 42 Ecology L. Currents 101 (2015). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.buffalo.edu/journal_articles/178
  49. ↑ "Wetland and Stream Mitigation Banking". westernlandowners.org. Retrieved 2024-08-06.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.