Mitigation That Works > Mitigation Options

Mitigation Options

Various options are available for mitigation, in addition to the traditional on-site concurrent option, depending on what can work best for the applicant and for the environment. Each option must conform with the appropriate local, state, and federal regulatory requirements and permit processes.

• Wetland Banking - A mitigation bank is a wetland, stream, or other aquatic resource area that has been restored, established, enhanced, or (in certain circumstances) preserved for the purpose of providing compensation for unavoidable impacts to aquatic resources permitted under Section 404 or a similar state or local wetland regulation. A mitigation bank may be created when a government agency, corporation, nonprofit organization, or other entity undertakes these activities under a formal agreement with a regulatory agency.
  • More on Wetland Mitigation Banking
  • Frequently Asked Questions: Wetland Mitigation Banking
  • Mitigation Banking Factsheet (U.S. EPA)
     
• In-Lieu Fee (ILF) Mitigation- In this approach to mitigation, a permittee pays a fee to a third party in lieu of conducting project-specific mitigation or buying credits from a mitigation bank. ILF mitigation is used mainly to compensate for minor impacts to wetlands when better approaches to compensation are not available, practicable, or when the use of an ILF is in the best interest of the environment. Compensation for larger impacts is usually provided by project-specific mitigation or a mitigation bank.
  
  An ILF represents the expected costs to a third party of replacing the wetland functions lost or degraded as a result of the permittee’s project. ILFs are typically held in trust until they can be combined with other ILFs to finance a mitigation project. The entity operating the trust is typically a nonprofit organization such as a local land trust, private conservation group, or government agency with demonstrated competence in natural resource management.
  • More on In-Lieu Fee (ILF) Mitigation
  • Frequently Asked Questions: In-Lieu Fee Mitigation

• Off-site mitigation - Compensatory mitigation that is not located at or near the project that is affecting wetlands. Off-site mitigation is generally only allowed when on-site mitigation is not practicable and environmentally preferable. See guidance on selecting a mitigation site using a watershed approach:
  • Western Washington Version (December 2009)
  • Eastern Washington Version (November 2010)

Also see examples of code language in critical areas ordinances related to off-site mitigation (PDF, 51KB).

• Advance mitigation - Compensatory mitigation in which the mitigation project is implemented before, and in anticipation of, future known impacts to wetlands. Advance mitigation has been used mostly for large mitigation projects that are constructed in distinct phases where the impacts to wetlands are known. Advance mitigation lets an applicant provide all of the compensation needed for the entire project affecting wetlands at one time.
  
  Although similar to mitigation banking, advance mitigation is different in several ways. Most important, advance mitigation is used only to compensate for a specific project (or projects) with pre-identified impacts to wetlands. Several key regulatory agencies are embarking on developing guidance for advance mitigation. This guidance will be available by mid 2011. For more information, please contact Lauren Driscoll.

Back to Top