I it poorly implemented likely motivated resource agencies to sit at the negotiating table and change 



present practice. 



Present federal policy requires the Idaho Transportation Department to avoid impacts to wetiands by 

 alternative roadway locations or benign construction techniques. Impacts to wetiands for which there 

 is no "practicable alternative" may require mitigation in the form of restoration or compensation. 



However, history has shown that wetiand restoration is, at times, impossible to accomplish where the 

 impaa occurs, comes with such ecological risks that successful mitigation cannot be assured, or can be 

 accomplished only at extraordinary cost. Use of a previously constructed, off-site wetiand may be 

 appropriate in these situations to compensate for wetiand losses. 



The team concluded that appropriate use of a wetiand bank can benefit both the Idaho Transportation 

 Department, and regulatory and resource agencies. It will allow for successful mitigation of several 

 projects with minor individual, but significant cumulative impacts. It will allow for better evaluation of 

 a mitigation proposal by presenting a functioning wetiand, rather than a paper plan. It will improve 

 agency coordination by positioning agencies in a planning rather than a reactive mode. And, it will 

 expedite project permit review. 



Examples of Idaho Transportation Department activities which may be mitigated by the wetland bank 

 are the placement of sliver fills for roadway widening or curve straightening, placement of fills for 

 bridge abutments and piers, placement of rip-rap on the face of existing roadway fills to prevent 

 erosion, and emergency maintenance of existing roadways threatened by flood or other natural 

 disaster. 



THE WETLAND BANK DOES NOT GIVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY CARTE BLANCHE 

 I The team agrees that use of the wetland bank comes with conditions. For example, a wetiand bank 



' should be capable of compensating for all the wetiand functions and values lost as a result of a project 



While the wetland bank will be considered one of the practicable mitigation alternatives for Idaho 

 Transportation activities, it may be used (^y after all other restoration and compensation methods have 

 been examined and found to be impracticable. 



Finally, it is recognized that the wetiand bank may not be appropriate mitigation for wetiands 

 considered unique because of their physical, chemical, or biological composition or ecological 

 importance. And, it may not be practical to establish a wetland bank for some wetiand classes, such as 

 bogs and forested wetiands. 



THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF WETLAND BANKING 

 The terms of the agreement state that Idaho Transportation may use its best judgement to locate and 

 develop individual wetland bank sites at depleted borrow sources, uneconomical remainders of right- 

 of-way, or other publicly owned properties. As a general rule, Idaho Transportation will locate 

 individual wetland bank sites at locations that have the physical, chemical, and biological character to 

 suppon wetiand development Guidelines for location of a wetland bank include, but are not limited 

 to: the bank site should be as close to the anticipated impact site as possible, the bank site should be 

 within the same hydrologic basin as the impact site, and the same public affected by an impact should 

 be compensated by the bank- 

 Prior to this agreement, borrow sources were reclaimed as prescribed by state law. This resulted in 

 steeply sloped pits, revegetated with grasses intended only to control erosion. With the finalized 

 agreement, Idaho Transportation will be encouraged to reclaim borrow sources in a manner that results 

 in fully functioning wetiands. This includes grading to encourage structure and diversity, the use of 

 I native trees, shrubs, and grasses that arc best adapted to the site, and the placement of structures to 

 provide fish and wildlife habitat 



