Mitigation Proposals that would Impede Plan Implementation Sample Clauses

Mitigation Proposals that would Impede Plan Implementation. ‌ If land acquisitions intended to fulfill mitigation requirements under ESA, CESA, section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code, or CEQA for a non-covered project is proposed in the Reserve Acquisition Area, the Wildlife Agencies will confer with the PCA to ensure that the acquisition will not conflict with the Plan or impede the Permittees' ability to meet Plan requirements. For example, CDFW may not be able to make required findings under CESA if issuance of a CESA permit conflicts with the HCP/NCCP. If a land acquisition intended to fulfill mitigation requirements will conflict with the Plan or impede the Permittee's ability to meet Plan requirements, the applicable Wildlife Agency(ies) will work with the applicant to design and implement alternative mitigation measures that will avoid such conflict or impediment. For example, if a land acquisition within the Reserve Acquisition Area is proposed to fulfill mitigation requirements for a non-Covered Activity, and the land proposed for acquisition is needed to fulfill compensatory mitigation requirements for Covered Activities, the applicable Wildlife Agency(ies) will work with the applicant to design and implement alternative mitigation measures . Such alternative mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: • Use of Wildlife Agency approved mitigation banks and conservation banks that have a service area boundary that includes the non-Covered activity; • Compensatory mitigation on lands outside the Plan Area (including lands within the limits of non-participating cities) • Additional onsite avoidance; and • Onsite restoration.