Mitigation that is incorporated into larger, regional conservation strategies, thus, is ecologically preferable to individual mitigation projects, which are often located on separate parcels of land with little connection to surrounding ecosystems. Conservation banking also has substantial economic advantages. Conservation banks can greatly ease these burdens, reducing mitigation compliance to a single transaction and giving project proponents the certainty of having complied with mandated mitigation requirements. The State's new policy on conservation banking is possible, and necessary, because of various State and Federal laws that mandate mitigation of environmentally-adverse projects or activities. For each acre impacted, a project proponent may be required to set aside or restore one acre or more.
Environmental mitigation is required under several State laws.
In addition, the California Coastal Act requires a project applicant to demonstrate that all feasible mitigation measures have been provided in order to minimize any adverse environmental effects of a project that is proposed along the California coast. Environmental mitigation is also required under Federal statutes. Also, the Federal Clean Water Act requires mitigation for activities that alter or harm existing wetlands. For instance, a typical property owner who seeks to develop or alter their land may take the steps necessary to satisfy the mitigation requirements by doing so on a portion of the land to be developed. On a parcel of 10 acres, two or three acres might be set aside as protected open space in order to mitigate for the proposed development.