Methodology Used by
Manitoba Infrastructure & Transportation
to Identify Mitigation Costs for Wetland
Impacts
KIMBER OSIOWY, M.Sc., P.Eng.
Manager of Environmental Services,
Manitoba Infrastructure and Transportation
WORKSHOP A: SYSTEMS FOR INCORPORATING FULL ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS IN
DECISION MAKING
Transportation Association of Canada Annual Conference
Halifax- Nova Scotia
September 2010
Presentation Outline
 Introduction of Full Cost Accounting
 Description of Methodology used by Manitoba
Infrastructure and Transportation (MIT) to Identify Costs
of Mitigation of Wetland Impacts
 Example
2
Full-cost Accounting
In the Manitoba Sustainable Development Act
Full-cost Accounting is defined as:
accounting for economic, environmental, landuse, human health, social and heritage costs and
benefits of a particular decision or action to
ensure no costs associated with the decision or
action, including externalized costs, are left
unaccounted for.
3
Full-cost Accounting
Full-cost Accounting is an all inclusive field of
Accounting with two major dimensions:
• internal costs which generate environmental cost
information to help management decisions on pricing,
on controlling overhead and projects costs etc.
• external or societal costs associated with costs to
individuals, society and the environment in general.
4
Full-cost Accounting
Internal vs External Costs
Although it may not be practical to implement all
aspects of full-cost accounting, in particular as it
pertains to external environmental societal costs, an
attempt must be made to monetize all measurable
internal costs so that more informative decisions on
the viability of a project are made.
5
Manitoba Habitat Mitigation/
Compensation Program
 A partnership between Manitoba Infrastructure and
Transportation, Manitoba Conservation and the
Manitoba Habitat Heritage Corporation
 The partnership was formalized under the Manitoba
Habitat Mitigation/Compensation Program (MHMCP)
 Initial emphasis on the North American Waterfowl
Management Plan Target Area in South Western
Manitoba with the intent of expanding it at a later
date to cover other habitats of conservation
importance in the province.
6
The Manitoba Habitat Mitigation/
Compensation Program (MHMCP)

The MHMCP expands the widely accepted
Hierarchy of Mitigation Options (Avoidance,
Minimizing and Compensation) to meet or surpass
the goal of no-net-loss.

It has a formalized procedure that includes Three
Basic Components:
1. Accounting System to track habitat gains and losses and to allow the transfer
of habitat debits and credits from one project to another.
2. Transfer of Suitable Habitats: suitable habitats created or acquired under the
program can be transferred to an appropriate agency to manage in perpetuity.
3. Habitat Compensation Fund to receive monetary contribution, in lieu of
implementing in-kind, on-site mitigation measures that may be too small to be
productive. The fund is held in trust by the Manitoba Habitat Heritage
Corporation and is used to fund approved projects to provide holistic ecosystem
functions and improved biological diversity.
7
The Habitat Compensation Fund
A key component of the fund is the calculation of the
costs of wetland impacts
Procedure
STEP 1
Very early in its planning, a project is discussed by the
three partners and all direct and indirect impacts are
identified. At this stage every effort is made to avoid
and minimize impacts. The unavoidable impacts are
measured and affected habitats are classified using
industry-accepted normal procedures and total areas
of Class 1, 2, 3 and 4 wetlands are calculated.
8
The Habitat Compensation Fund
STEP 2
Manitoba Conservation and the Manitoba Habitat
Heritage Corporation review the affected ecosystem
where the project is located and identify the best way
to compensate for the impacts and specify what
percentage of the impacts would have to be
compensated by restoring or enhancing existing
wetlands and what percentage of the impacts would
have to be compensated by establishing
conservation agreements of private lands.
9
The Habitat Compensation Fund
STEP 3
Compensation ratios are discussed and determined.
Usually the following ratios are used:
WETLAND
Class 1
Class 2
Class 3
Class 4
RESTORATION
8:1
6:1
5:1
3:1
PRESERVATION
15:1
12:1
6:1
3:1
10
The Habitat Compensation Fund
STEP 4
At this point the per unit costs to restore or to preserve are reviewed and
agreed upon. Presently the following unit costs are used in Manitoba:
Preservation
Restoration
$300/acre
$1000 - $3500/acre
( depending on size)
STEP 5
Totals are calculated, Treasury Board approval is received and funds
are transferred into the Fund
STEP 6
Mitigations are implemented
11
Example
 A recent proposal By Manitoba Infrastructure And
Transportation for the Extension of The Brandon
Eastern Access resulted in direct or indirect impacts to
20 acres of wetlands (Class 3) and associated upland
habitats.
 It was decided that these impacts would be
compensated as follows:
30% by restoration/enhancement of existing
wetlands
70% by conservation agreements for the
protection of existing wetlands on private
lands
12
Example
Calculations
Cost of Compensation by Restoration/Enhancement
20 ACRES X 30/100 = 6 ACRES
6 ACRES X 5 (RATIO 5:1 FOR CLASS 3 WETALNDS) = 30 ACRES
30 ACRES X ( $1690/ACRE *) = $ 50,800.00
* cost per acre to restore the area involved
13
Example
Cost Of Preservation (Conservation Agreement)
20 ACRES X 70/100 = 14 ACRES
14 ACRES X 6 ( 6:1 RATIO FOR CLASS 3 WETLANDS) = 84 ACRES
84 ACRES X $ 300/ACRE = $ 25,200.00
Total Cost Of Compensation
$ 50,800.00 + $ 25,200.00 = $ 76,800.00
14
Example #1
 Restoration by a 2.5 ft soil plug
15
Example #2
 Restored and secured by the program
16
Example #3
 Preserved by the program
17
Thank You !
Questions?
18