National Academies Press: OpenBook
Page i
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14166.
×
Page R1
Page ii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14166.
×
Page R2
Page iii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14166.
×
Page R3
Page iv
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14166.
×
Page R4
Page v
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14166.
×
Page R5
Page vi
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14166.
×
Page R6
Page vii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14166.
×
Page R7
Page viii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14166.
×
Page R8
Page ix
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14166.
×
Page R9
Page x
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14166.
×
Page R10

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2008 www.TRB.org N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP REPORT 615 Subject Areas Planning and Administration • Energy and Environment • Highway and Facility Design • Maintenance Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings John A. Bissonette Patricia C. Cramer U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY—UTAH COOPERATIVE FISH AND WILDLIFE RESEARCH UNIT UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, UT Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board’s recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 615 Project 25-27 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 978-0-309-11740-1 Library of Congress Control Number 2008905372 © 2008 Transportation Research Board COPYRIGHT PERMISSION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the Governing Board’s judgment that the program concerned is of national importance and appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and, while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee according to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research Board Executive Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and the individual states participating in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report.

CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 615 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Christopher J. Hedges, Senior Program Officer Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 25-27 PANEL Field of Transportation Planning—Area of Impact Analysis J. M. Yowell, Versailles, KY (Chair) Kyle Williams, New York State DOT, Albany, NY Jason E. Alcott, Minnesota DOT, St. Paul, MN Brendan K. Chan, Ottawa, ON Kelly O. Cohen, California DOT, Sacramento, CA Michael W. Hubbard, Missouri Department of Conservation, Jefferson City, MO Jerald M. Powell, Lyons, CO Jodi R. Sivak, Gloucester, MA Mary E. Gray, FHWA Liaison Christine Gerencher, TRB Liaison C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S Cover photograph: Wolverine Overpass in Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada (© K. Gunson, used with permission).

AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported herein was conducted under NCHRP Project 25-27 by the U.S. Geological Sur- vey (USGS) Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Wildland Resources, Col- lege of Natural Resources at Utah State University (USU); Department of Civil Engineering, Ryerson Uni- versity; Engineering Professional Development Department, University of Wisconsin; Texas A&M University; Sylvan Consulting Ltd., Invermere British Columbia, and Western Transportation Institute at Montana State University. Utah State University was awarded the prime contract for this study. The work undertaken at the Uni- versity of Wisconsin, Texas A&M University, Ryerson University, Sylvan Consulting Ltd., and Montana State University was performed under separate subcontracts with Utah State University. Principal inves- tigator for the effort is John A. Bissonette, Leader of the USGS Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit at Utah State University and Professor in the Department of Wildland Resources. The work was done under the general supervision of Professor Bissonette with his Research Associate Dr. Patricia Cramer and his students Silvia Rosa and Carrie O’Brien at USU. Paul Jones, Jamey Anderson, Brian Jennings, Karen Wolfe, and Bill Adair at USU provided important technical help. The work at Ryer- son University was done under the supervision of Dr. Bhagwant Persaud with the assistance of Craig Lyon, Research Associate. The work at the University of Wisconsin and later at Texas A&M University was done under the supervision of Dr. Keith Knapp with the assistance of Ethan Shaw Schowalter-Hay. The work done by Sylvan Consulting, Ltd. was accomplished by Nancy Newhouse and Trevor Kinley. Work per- formed at the Western Transportation Institute at Montana State University was done by Dr. Anthony Clevenger with the assistance of Amanda Hardy and Kari Gunson. Sandra Jacobson, Wildlife Biologist, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Redwood Sciences Lab, Pacific Southwest Research Sta- tion, and Ingrid Brakop, Coordinator (former), Material Damage Loss Prevention, Insurance Corpora- tion of British Columbia, provided significant input to the evaluation of Task 3, and Ms. Jacobson pro- vided critical help with the Interactive Decision Guide. Lead authors for report sections are as follows: • Sections 2.2 and 2.3: Patricia C. Cramer and John A. Bissonette • Section 3.1: Keith Knapp, Bhagwant Persaud, Craig Lyon, and Ethan Shaw Schowalter-Hay • Sections 3.2 and 3.3, and Appendix E: Anthony P. Clevenger, Amanda Hardy, and Kari Gunson • Section 3.4: John A. Bissonette, Silvia Rosa, and Carrie O’Brien (Utah); Nancy Newhouse and Trevor Kinley (British Columbia) • Sections 3.5 and 3.6: John A. Bissonette We appreciate the access to the Kootenay River Ranch property provided by D. Hillary and T. Ennis of the Nature Conservancy of Canada. Research for the British Columbia segment of the study on the influ- ence of roads on small mammals (Section 3.4) was conducted under permit CB05-9954 issued by the British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. Dr. H. Schwantje of the British Columbia Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection was helpful in obtaining a provincial research permit. We thank C. Kassar, D. Ferreria, R. Klafki, T. McAllister, and H. Page for help with field work and species identification. Many thanks to Bill Adair for his help with the hierarchical monothetic agglomerative clustering analy- sis discussed in Section 3.5. The following list provides the affiliations of all authors who contributed to this report: Utah State University, U.S. Geological Survey— Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit John A. Bissonette Patricia C. Cramer Silvia Rosa Carrie O’Brien Paul Jones Jamey Anderson Brian Jennings Karen G. Wolfe Montana State University Anthony P. Clevenger Amanda Hardy Kari Gunson University of Wisconsin–Madison Keith K. Knapp Ethan Shaw Schowalter-Hay

Ryerson University Bhagwant Persaud Craig Lyon Sylvan Consulting, Ltd. Nancy Newhouse Trevor Kinley U.S. Forest Service Sandra Jacobson Insurance Corporation of British Columbia Ingrid Brakop

This report documents the development of an interactive, web-based decision guide pro- tocol for the selection, configuration, and location of wildlife crossings. For the first time, transportation planners and designers and wildlife ecologists have access to clearly written, structured guidelines to help reduce loss of property and life due to wildlife–vehicle colli- sions, while protecting wildlife and their habitat. The guidelines were based on goals and needs identified and prioritized by transportation professionals from across North America, and developed using the results of five parallel scientific studies. Every year, the costs of personal injuries and property damage resulting from wildlife– vehicle collisions are considerable and increasing. Various means have been employed to mitigate these collisions, with varying degrees of success. In recent years, highway agencies have also placed a growing emphasis on protecting the environment. While many smaller species of animals do not pose a threat to vehicles through collisions, they experience sig- nificant habitat loss and fragmentation as a result of roadway alignments. Transportation corridors limit the natural movement of wildlife, affecting individual species and eco- systems. There has been considerable research on the provision of wildlife crossings, but there is a lack of data on their effectiveness and on the methods most effective for reducing wildlife–vehicle collisions and increasing landscape permeability for species in specific land- scapes. It also appears that crossings may work well for one species but not for others. An international scan on wildlife habitat connectivity documented various strategies and designs used in Europe to improve the connectivity of wildlife habitats. Developing success- ful designs, methods, and strategies to make roadways more permeable to wildlife is but one aspect of managing highways to avoid or minimize affects to the natural environment and maintaining safety for motorists. This study was undertaken to provide state DOTs with guidance on the use and effectiveness of wildlife crossings to mitigate habitat fragmentation and reduce the number of animal–vehicle collisions on our roadways. Under NCHRP Project 25-27, a research team led by John Bissonette and Patricia Cramer of Utah State University developed guidelines for the selection, configuration, location, monitoring, evaluation, and maintenance of wildlife crossings. The research was split into two phases. In the first phase, the team reviewed research and current practices, and con- ducted a survey of more than 400 respondents on existing wildlife crossings across the United States and Canada. In the second phase, a number of research studies were con- ducted: an analysis of wildlife–vehicle collision data, a study on the accuracy of spatial modeling tools used to predict the influence of roadway geometry on wildlife–vehicle col- lisions, modeling of collision hotspots, a study on the influence of roads on small mammals, and an analysis of the spacing of crossings needed to restore fragmented habitat and migra- F O R E W O R D By Christopher J. Hedges Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

tion patterns. Based on the results, the research team developed an interactive web-based decision guide protocol offering guidance on the selection, configuration, and location of crossing types, along with suggestions for their monitoring, evaluation, and maintenance. The decision tool is outlined in the report and can be found on the web at www.wildlifeand roads.org and on the AASHTO website (environment.transportation.org/environmental_ issues/wildlife_roads/decision_guide/manual).

C O N T E N T S 1 Summary 10 Chapter 1 Introduction and Research Approach 10 Introduction 12 Research Approach 13 Structure of the Report 15 Chapter 2 Phase 1 Summary 15 2.1 Literature Search and Database 15 2.2 The State of the Practice and Science of Wildlife Crossings in North America 15 Introduction 16 Research Approach: Methods and Data 16 Findings and Results 16 Interpretation, Appraisal, and Applications 20 Conclusions and Suggested Research 21 2.3 Priorities in Research and Practice 21 Introduction 21 Research Approach: Methods and Data 23 Findings and Results 27 Interpretation, Appraisal, and Applications 28 Conclusions and Suggested Research 30 Chapter 3 Phase 2 Segments 30 3.1 Safety Data Analysis Aspects 30 Introduction 31 Research Approach: Methods and Data 35 Findings and Results 44 Interpretation, Appraisal, and Applications 50 Conclusions and Suggested Research 53 3.2 Limiting Effects of Roadkill Reporting Data Due to Spatial Inaccuracy 53 Introduction 53 Research Approach: Methods and Data 57 Findings and Results 59 Interpretation, Appraisal, and Applications 62 Conclusions and Suggested Research 62 3.3 Hotspots Modeling 62 Introduction 63 Research Approach: Methods and Data 64 Findings and Results 74 Interpretation, Appraisal, and Applications 75 Conclusions

76 3.4 Influence of Roads on Small Mammals 76 Introduction 77 Research Approach: Methods and Data 80 Findings and Results 85 Interpretation, Appraisal, and Applications 86 Conclusions 86 3.5 Restoring Habitat Networks with Allometrically Scaled Wildlife Crossings 86 Introduction 87 Research Approach: Methods and Data 90 Findings and Results 93 Interpretation, Appraisal, and Applications 94 Conclusions 96 3.6 Interpretation of Research Results 98 Chapter 4 Decision Guide 110 References 118 Appendix A Priority Tables and Plan of Action 132 Appendix B Application of Safety Performance Functions in Other States or Time Periods 135 Appendix C Theoretical Background of Network Screening for Proportion Method 137 Appendix D Illustrating Regression to the Mean 139 Appendix E A Literature Review of Field Studies and Spatial Analyses for Hotspot Identification of Wildlife–Vehicle Collisions 157 Appendix F Distance Sampling 159 Appendix G Allometric Scaling

Next: Summary »
Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 615: Evaluation of the Use and Effectiveness of Wildlife Crossings explores the development of an interactive, web-based decision guide protocol for the selection, configuration, and location of wildlife crossings. The decision tool as outlined in the report is available online.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!