Institute of the Environment

Bluebird boxes were attached to the back of small road signs and are maintained by the maintenance sign crew with minimal time away from their primary duties. Because locations were chosen where bluebirds had already been seen, success has been 100% since the project started in 2001. In 2002, 120 bluebirds were fledged and approximately 120 tree swallows as well. So far in 2003 there have been 30 pair of nesting bluebirds. We have had more problems this year with English sparrows killing bluebird chicks. Last year two boxes suffered from raccoon predation but that has not been repeated since the sign poles were greased. Costs were for materials only, boxes were built by the winter night crews when they were not plowing.

I examined the effects of road mortality on a population of western painted turtles (Chrysemys picta belli) in west-central Montana; these turtles make up the majority of road mortalities in a section of highway that bisects the Ninepipes National Wildlife Refuge. The objective of my barrier fencing experiment was to determine whether turtles were able to breach fencing designed to direct turtles towards crossing structures and thereby keep them off the road. I constructed 45.7-cm-high turtle enclosures out of 2- by 5-cm fencing with and without 10- or 15-cm-high flashing attached at the top. Turtles were placed in the enclosures, and behavior was observed for one hour. Of 124 turtles, only four (3.2%) were able to climb to the flashing. No turtles climbed over the flashing within the time allowed. In enclosures without flashing, two (3.8%) were able to breach the fencing. The results of this experiment will help in the design of appropriate barriers to keep turtles off the road and direct them towards crossing structures.

Wildlife movement and related road crossing strategies are becoming an increasingly important factor in the development of transportation projects in Vermont – whether these projects involve reconstruction on existing alignment or new construction. The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) and the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife (VDFW) have identified wildlife movement and habitat connectivity as important factors to consider in the transportation project development process from three perspectives: human safety, environmental stewardship, and fiscal responsibility. Moreover, we have begun to construct wildlife crossing structures, in collaboration with VDFW, in some recent transportation projects. Unfortunately, there is a lack of wildlife road crossing data to support the inclusion, location, design, and construction of these crossings in many parts of the state. Currently, much of the information that is used in the design and location of wildlife crossing structures is from an existing database of road crossing and road mortality information for white-tailed deer, moose and black bear that is maintained by the VDFW. To assist in making, and implementing, these sometimes very expensive project decisions, VTrans desires to have a resource review team to gather wildlife movement, habitat and road mortality data relevant to specific projects. VTrans, in collaboration with VDFW, Keeping Track, Inc., and Jim Andrews of Middlebury College, has developed an inter-agency Wildlife Crossing Team. The primary objective of this initiative is to develop a data gathering protocol to assess habitat fragmented or otherwise affected by Vermont roads, and to train a group of VTrans staff to utilize that protocol as a project planning tool. The goal of this effort is to gather sufficient data regarding wildlife movement and habitat conditions, in the early stages of the transportation project development process, to make substantive recommendations, in conjunction with VDFW, to project managers and designers so that wildlife movement and ecological connectivity can be considered in the design and construction of appropriate VTrans projects. Through this process wildlife movement and habitat connectivity can become an integral part of the environmental review process at VTrans – similar to how historic, archaeological, and other natural resources are considered. It is hoped that this effort will take wildlife movement and habitat connectivity beyond an issue of compliance and become a more standard consideration for transportation projects in Vermont where appropriate. This paper will discuss the development of this inter-agency wildlife crossing team.

Piles are integral components of many overwater and in-water structures, providing support for piers and bridges, functioning as fenders and dolphins to protect other structures, and are used to construct breakwaters and bulkheads. While treated-wood and concrete piles are commonly used for construction of these structures, there is a growing trend toward the use of hollow steel piles. In the Pacific Northwest, several recently-reported fish-kills that occurred during the installation of piles have raised concern among Federal and state agencies charged with protecting aquatic resources. Federal concern centers primarily on implementation of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) provisions of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. Injuries to fishes inflicted by pile driving are poorly studied, but include rupture of the swim bladder and internal hemorrhaging. The mechanism of injury appears to be the intense underwater pressure wave generated during some pile-driving activities. The type and intensity of the underwater sounds produced depend on a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, the type and size of the pile, the firmness of the substrate and depth of water into which the pile is being driven, and the type and size of the pile-driving hammer. In general, driving steel piles with an impact hammer appears to generate pressure waves that are more harmful than those generated by impact-driving of concrete or wood piles, or by vibratory-hammer driving of any type of pile. Of the reported fish-kills, all have occurred during impact-driving of steel piles. However, conditions required to produce sound pressure waves that can injure or kill fishes are not presently understood. Recent reports of fishes killed during pile driving are producing changes in the way that such activities are being viewed by the Washington State Habitat Branch of the National Marine Fisheries Service during ESA and EFH consultations. These changes include requirements for hydro-acoustic monitoring of the sound pressure levels generated during pile driving, and, if maximum thresholds are exceeded, the incorporation of measures to reduce those sound pressure levels. This presentation discusses the approach taken by the Washington State Habitat Branch to address the uncertainties associated with pile driving and the adverse effects this activity may have on ESA-listed salmonids and EFH.

Funding source: Florida Department of Transportation Total Budget: $407,000 Project Period: April 2001 – April 2004 The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) has documented an increase in the number of transportation-related bear deaths (roadkill) since the late 1970’s. In addition to impacts on bear populations, vehicle collisions with bears often are traumatic for the people involved and may cause significant collateral damage and personal injury. For these reasons, and because of the lack of definitive information on the subject, the FWC partnered with the Florida Department of Transportation to design a project that would quantify the impacts of roadkill on bear populations in Florida. Our study design incorporates two main features: population size enumeration and range delineation for bears in six core areas across Florida. As genetic analyses have improved and laboratory costs decreased, DNA techniques have been used for a wide variety of studies on bears. Our methodology involves sampling bears via hairs left on barbed wire strands surrounding bait sites (hair snare) randomly placed in a systematic grid across each study area. We will then derive population abundance estimates by using individual identification from the DNA analysis within a mark-recapture framework. We will determine both core and peripheral bear range across Florida. Core bear range is defined as that which contains breeding females and peripheral range as that which contains bear signs but no evidence of breeding females. Using an estimate of minimum patch size needed for bears, we sectioned the entire state into 10,000-acre blocks to determine whether bears are present or absent in each block. We polled local residents and area biologists to help ascertain areas occupied by bears. We will extrapolate densities derived from the mark-recapture abundance estimates to the entire area of core bear range within each of the six areas. The final product will be a detailed range map and corresponding population estimate for each of the core populations. We will calculate the impacts of roads within each core population and across the state by determining the proportion of roadkill in relation to abundance estimates derived from the DNA analysis. The numbers generated from this analysis will be compared to literature and published data on sustainable mortality rates for black bears. We will document and examine the relationship between roadkill, road density, traffic volume, and estimated abundance for trends in these parameters. We will identify areas of significant impact and, if necessary, make recommendations on how to improve the relationship between roads and black bears in these areas. Lastly, we will examine the updated bear range maps for signs of fragmentation and isolation related to roads.

The Maine Interagency work group on collisions between wildlife and motor vehicles actively tracks the recorded occurrences of crashes of animals with vehicles. As part of its ongoing program of public education, the group first used the maps in 1999. The data are gained from crash reports filed by law enforcement personnel. The Maine Department of Transportation’s traffic statistic’s section analyses the information. The effort is then developed into map graphics by the department’s cartographic unit. Associated crash data and driving tips are also included on the maps. These are circulated to other state agencies, towns, schools and tourism facilities throughout the state and have received a variety of positive responses. Information on crash locations as mapped is utilized by the work group to determine chronic crash locales and for potential sites to install mitigation methodologies.

Congress is in the process of reauthorizing TEA-21, the six-year, $300 billion transportation bill, providing an excellent opportunity to integrate many of the ideals brought forth in ICOET into transportation policy. With appropriate federal guidance, such best practices in the areas of wildlife, fisheries, wetlands, water quality, and overall ecosystems management could become the standard. Likewise, without support within the new bill, many states and practitioners will find it more difficult to continue making positive strides in stewardship and resource protection. Reauthorization issues that promise to be of interest to ICOET participants include: 1. Environmental streamlining 2. Transportation enhancements 3. Impact mitigation 4. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) 5. Continuation of University Transportation Centers (UTC) 6. Cooperative Environmental Research Program (CERP) 7. Habitat connectivity across transportation corridors (aquatic and terrestrial) 8. Transportation on Federal lands 9. Landscape level transportation planning

The Florida Department of Transportation has developed a completely new process for how the State of Florida plans transportation projects and accomplishes environmental review and consideration of sociocultural effects. The new process for transportation decision making was developed by FDOT working in conjunction with federal and state agencies to develop an entirely new process that efficiently meets statutory requirements and delivers projects which respect and protect Florida’s resources. The new process is called “Efficient Transportation Decision Making” or the ETDM Process. The objectives of the multi-agency working group that developed this process were outlined by Congress in Section 1309 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21): • Provide early and continuous involvement of agencies and the public in the review process. • Integrate environmental review and permitting processes. • Establish coordinated time schedules for agency action. • Establish effective dispute resolution mechanisms. • Provide access to information through use of technology. FDOT assembled 23 federal and state agencies at the initial “summit” in February 2000 to ask for their support and commitment to develop this process. Summit participants developed a “vision statement” for the new process. Their agencies then participated in a series of multi-agency meetings to identify the elements of a process that would improve efficiency (early involvement, easy access to good data, continuous agency and community involvement, teamwork, a method to screen projects early, and an effective method for handling disputes). Early agency involvement is provided through two “screening” events, which occur early in project planning and before significant engineering work proceeds. These events are the “Planning Screen” and the “Programming Screen.” Agency input received early in planning may identify the need for wildlife crossings, community-expressed concerns or other needs for reconfiguration of a project to avoid or minimize adverse effects. This early awareness improves the project cost estimates, which can affect project priorities. Coordination is achieved through Environmental Technical Advisory Teams (ETATs) which are formed for each of the seven FDOT districts. ETAT members review project information and provide input about technical scopes of work required for project development. These focused scopes of work are expected to improve the quality of information considered and will allow the FDOT to address key issues of concern. All coordination is achieved using the Environmental Screening Tool (EST). This is an Internet-accessible interactive database system with GIS which allows ETAT members and the public to view project plans and the effects on resources. Stakeholder input is documented in the EST and visible to all parties involved in transportation decision making. The EST is described more fully in a companion paper. A key provision in the ETDM Process is that disputed projects do not advance to the FDOT Work Program until dispute resolution has occurred. A methodology for resolving disputes is built into the new process and focuses problem resolution at the local level where consultation among ETAT members is expected to resolve most disputes prior to elevation within agencies.

Over the past decade, western Washington has experienced rapid growth in population and development. Recently, the listing of a variety of salmonid fish species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) has heightened the need to integrate the needs of listed species and people, as continued growth is predicted for the area. Currently, transportation infrastructure projects are reviewed for compliance with the ESA and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) on a project-by-project basis. Considering the complexity and speed of which urbanization is occurring in western Washington, this approach presents multiple problems, including: missed opportunities for minimizing impacts, inadequately analyzed indirect and cumulative effects/impacts, significant permitting delays, and uncoordinated review and conservation. The traditional project review/permit acquisition processes is not well suited for dealing with ESA-listed species in quickly urbanizing environments. Without an adequate mechanism for integrating land-use planning and ESA concerns, future actions could contribute to the continued degradation of ecosystems upon which listed species depend, and may encounter permitting delays. Our paper presents a recommended approach to better integrate land-use planning and ESA concerns. Our recommendation is that those local jurisdictions with the greatest juxtaposition of transportation infrastructure projects and occurrence of listed species develop regional planning processes for ESA compliance. These processes would combine the state’s Growth Management Act and ESA requirements, culminating in the implementation of multi-species Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) on a city/county basis. This would provide increased certainty to transportation planners and developers in understanding the constraints, opportunities, and conservation measures necessary to adequately conserve listed species. We discuss the expected outcomes, benefits, disadvantages and assumptions behind such an approach. We provide examples of similar efforts that have involved planning for transportation infrastructure and address the cost and level of effort needed to implement multi-species regional HCPs. We also describe how delivery of transportation projects may be streamlined with this approach.

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), together with the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (NYSOPRHP) and New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT), is conducting a riverine wetland restoration project at Strawberry Island. Strawberry Island is located at the divergence of the Tonawanda and Chippawa Channels of the Niagara River, near the City of Buffalo, in western New York. The majority of the funding for the project comes from New York’s 1996 Clean Water / Clean Air Bond Act, which was approved by voters and signed by Governor George E. Pataki. Additional funding was provided by NYSDOT as an in-lieu fee solution to unavoidable impacts to freshwater wetlands. The island, which was once more than 200 acres in size, has been severely impacted by sand and gravel mining as well as natural erosive forces. By 1993 the island had been reduced to less than six acres. Critical water levels, existing bottom topography, weather-related impacts, and recreational and commercial boating along with utilization by fish and wildlife all need to be considered. This paper describes the island history, design, regulatory approval process and construction activities utilized to protect /restore this ecologically sensitive site. Construction was completed in November 2001. Preliminary results suggest that erosion to the island has been halted and a flourishing wetland community is developing. Strawberry Island is located at the divergence of the Tonawanda and Chippawa Channels of the Niagara River near Buffalo, New York. The island was first surveyed in 1814 and found to be approximately 100 acres in size. By 1912, the island had grown to over 200 acres, when dredged materials from the construction of the Erie Canal and Black Rock Lock were placed on the site. From 1926 until 1953, the island was mined for sand and gravel to construct roads and other infrastructure for the growing City of Buffalo. By the time the mining ceased, barely twenty-five acres of the original island remained. Archived maps and aerial photography suggest that portions of the island were once productive riverine wetlands. Since that time, erosion from high-water storm events, ice scour and boat traffic have reduced the island to approximately six acres (Leuchner 1998). In the spring of 1997 both Phase I and II were completed. An aquatic habitat restoration project was completed with funding from the New York State 1996 Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act. Rip-rap breakwaters were constructed, and wetland soil was transported from a nearby freshwater wetland. Additional wetland plants were established to supplement natural revegetation of the wetland areas, totaling three acres. The goal of the Phase III project was to protect Strawberry Island from further erosion, and restore a small portion of wetlands that were once more abundant in the river corridor.