When does conservation banking make sense? When there are economies of scale and ecologies of scale, so to speak. The ecological benefit of conservation banking is the provision of larger-scale, on-the-ground conservation with a non-wasting endowment to cover management costs. There can also be economies of scale in banking that translate to a cheaper way to meet the mitigation needs of companies applying for endangered species ‘take’ permits. Which equals more, better environmental restoration and protection.
Here’s a scenario where it appears that there could be a large-scale impact on the endangered Karner blue butterfly. The impact is mining for sand used in fracking for natural gas. The natural gas industry needs a huge sandbox to get the job done. A recent Business Week article noted that “the industry will boost its consumption of sand and other proppants 20 percent this year to as much as 100 billion pounds.” And the sand needs to be just right… a certain size, a certain roundness… so this sand is only found in choice regions in the US. The graphic here shows sand good for fracking – in red – from a October 2011 presentation by Wisconsin state senior geologist Bruce Brown (cited in this article).
Wisconsin is ground central in the sand mining boom. The tricky thing is that there’s an endangered species who likes that same sandy soil in Wisconsin – the Karner blue butterfly. The graphic below shows a fairly close overlap with the butterfly habitat (in blue) and mining activity (red circles).
It might not be gloom-and-doom for the butterfly:
Cathy Carnes, a Fish and Wildlife Service endangered species coordinator in Wisconsin, said, “Time will tell how these frac sand mining companies are going to affect Karner blues… If they are compliant with the laws and regulations and actually do their endangered resources reviews, we may be OK. If there’s companies that are skipping that step,” she said, “they could be slipping through the cracks.” (link)
The state Department of Natural Resources already has a Habitat Conservation Plan, which includes surveying, construction protocols, maintaining existing habitat, and restoring degraded habitat (and costs from $2,500-$5,000 to get in on that). The large-scale removal of sand is a new twist that might not be covered by the existing plan. If that’s the case, then it provides an opportunity for conservation banking to meet the additional impact on the species. If the Karner blue butterfly species recovery plan can be met with conservation banking then why not, Wisconsin? Why is California the only one to get all the fun* when it comes to conservation banking?
*California represents over 90% of conservation banking activity (source: SpeciesBanking.com)
Madsen Environmental 