Coverage of the National Mitigation and Ecosystem Banking Conference - May 6

Becca Madsen on May 10, 2010 Comment

...continuing coverage on the National Mitigation and Ecosystem Banking conference in Austin Texas from May 3-6.

Emerging Markets II Session

Jim Klang, of Keiser Associates, spoke about a project called the Conservation Market of Minnesota. The project, amongst other things, is developing tools and on-the-ground verification of water quality credits from agriculture management practices. Stacking is of interest to be able to compete with the $100-$200/acre that farmers currently get for corn. Some of the ecosystem services the project considered were drinking water protection, pollinator services, and storm water (storage and treatment).

Ben Guillon spoke from New Forests, a firm whose Eco-Products fund has invested $50 million in land based carbon and mitigation banking (1 approved mitigation bank and 7 pending approval). Mr. Guillon reported no movement on the Senate climate bill, although in the bill were funds for wetland restoration and climate change adaption funds for species. State markets are moving, but there are no protocols yet for carbon sequestration from wetlands. There's no clear or easy route for carbon credits from forested wetlands. If an acre of wetlands sequestered 0.5 ton of CO2, and generally a project needs to deliver >20,000 tons/year to be viable, you'd need to have a project of over 40,000 acres for carbon. On top of that, there are other issues with CO2 sequestration from wetlands, among them being that there's no methodology, CO2 sequestration is already one of the ecosystem services that comes from wetland restoration and there is questionable financial additionality, and there are baseline issues (wetlands release methane - a greenhouse gas, and when a wetland is impacted, it releases CO2).

Andrew Dodd, from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, spoke about interest in compensation banking and protected areas in the European Union (EU) & particularly in the UK. Depending on the results of the UK's election today, the banking approach may be on the horizon in the UK. Several EU Directives provide some form of environmental protection, one of which - Natura 2000. Designation as a Natura 2000 site makes it very difficult to impact the site and requires offsets if an impact is allowed. In the UK, there were 20 cases of impacts to Natura 2000 sites between 1994 to 2000. Impacts are reviewed on a case-by-case basis and requires like for like offsets. But mitigation usually happens after the impact, which is one of the reasons the UK has been interested in habitat banking.

New Ground in Conservation Banking Session

Shauna Ginger with the US Fish and Wildlife Service spoke about species relocations in conservation banking (eg -move the animal from here to there). Gopher tortoises are listed as an endangered species in the western portion of the animal's range - basically in the bottom of Mississippi and a tiny bit of eastern Louisiana and southern Alabama. For gopher tortoises, there's relocation, but there's also management. Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle (VELB) is another species that is 'relocated' during conservation banking because it involves transplanting the impacted elderberry and actually moving the beetles that live on the plant. For permanent protection of endangered species on conservation banks, climate change has to be considered. For one example - the gopher tortoise likes to live in the long leaf pine ecosystem, but the western range of the tortoise's habitat is projected to shift to a different type of habitat, so if a bank is placed in an area intending permanent protection... it won't be a great home for tortoises in the future.

Howard Brown from the National Marine Fisheries Services, talked about conservation banking for salmon and steelhead in Washington and California. NOAA thinks that conservation banks can target threats to salmonid species by providing riparian protection, floodplain protection, to protection of estuarine and spawning habitat. In Washington and California, there are 3 active conservation banks and 4 banks pending approval for salmon and steelhead. There's a lack of experience and institutional knowledge about conservation banking in NOAA and a dearth of resources dedicated to it (there is only one half-time position). NOAA is developing policy guidance in WA and CA to help staff with conservation banking.

Lora Zimmerman, from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, spoke about the Carolina Heelsplitter Conservation Bank, which was recently approved. The Carolina Heelsplitter is a critically endangered freshwater mussel found in four watersheds on the border of North and South Carolina near the Charlotte metro area, facing economic development pressures. For the viability of the species, it's not good enough to just leave the stream alone, but all development activity in the watershed affects the mussel. The difficulty in conserving the species is that it's difficult to find the jurisdictional hook. But when a County government had plans to expand sewer lines, the Fish and Wildlife Service worked with the County to develop an ordinance that created a Carolina Heelsplitter zone and requires riparian buffer and restrictions on impervious surface (eg - driveways, roofs, roads). This county ordinance is the demand driver for conservation banking, because if impacts are going to occur in the zone, developers have the option of purchasing conservation bank credits from the bank. The bank is located in a different watershed which has no development pressure. Five development projects have purchased credits from the conservation bank, and a recent survey has shown a record number of individual mussels in the conservation bank area. Ms. Zimmerman noted that both the banker and the Agency faced some risk. For the banker, there was the risk that the bank would never be economically viable. And for the regulator/agency, there was a risk in putting all of their conservation focus in one watershed, but it has proven to be successful for both parties.