Montana § 87-5-911 - Compensatory Mitigation -- Findings

§ 87-5-911. Compensatory Mitigation -- Findings

Compensatory mitigation -- findings. (1) The legislature finds that allowing a project developer to provide compensatory mitigation for the debits of a project is consistent with the purpose of incentivizing voluntary conservation measures for sage grouse habitat and populations. The project developer may provide compensatory mitigation by: (a) using the habitat quantification tool to calculate the debits attributable to the project; and (b) under a mitigation plan approved by the oversight team, offsetting those debits in whole or in part by: (i) purchasing an equal number of credits from a habitat exchange authorized by the United States fish and wildlife service or from the available credits tracked by the oversight team pursuant to 87-5-904 . Payments received for credits tracked by the oversight team must be deposited in the sage grouse stewardship account established in 87-5-909 . (ii) if sufficient conservation credits are unavailable for purchase, making a financial contribution to the sage grouse stewardship account established in 87-5-909 that is equal to the average cost of the credits that would otherwise be required; (iii) providing funds to establish a habitat exchange or finance a conservation project for the purpose of creating credits to offset debits. However, the funds may not be used to subsidize mitigation by or decrease the mitigation obligations of any party involved in the project. (iv) undertaking other mitigation options identified and approved by the oversight team, including but not limited to sage grouse habitat enhancement, participation in a conservation bank, or funding stand-alone mitigation actions. (2) All mitigation undertaken pursuant to this section must be taken in consideration of applicable United States fish and wildlife service sage grouse policies, state law, and any rules adopted pursuant to this part. (3) A mitigation action taken under this section must be conducted within general habitat, core areas, or connectivity areas. (4) A project developer may submit alternative locations for a project to compare the compensatory mitigation requirements of each and choose which alternative to develop based upon that information.