Making Connections for Wildlife
Aligning Transportation Projects
with State Wildlife Action Plans: A Step-by-Step Guide for
Integrated
Conservation Planning
Background
Priority Conservation Need:
Avoiding Wildlife Impacts and Placing Effective Mitigation in
Transportation Planning
Animals move on a daily, seasonal and lifetime
basis to meet their needs for forage, habitat and breeding. The
importance of habitat connectivity to ecosystem functionality is
well documented in the literature (e.g., Noss and Cooperrider 1994;
Noss 1983) affecting both terrestrial and aquatic wildlife. Human
developments and activities often create barriers to wildlife
movement, preventing these needs from being adequately met.
Restrictions on these movements affect wildlife at all spatial
scales, impacting individual animals as well as populations and even
species. Because of these impacts, habitat fragmentation is now
recognized as one of the greatest threats to biodiversity and the
decline of species worldwide (Ehrlich 1986; Wilcove et al. 1998).
Transportation infrastructure, in particular,
is a principal cause of habitat fragmentation, with negative impacts
on wildlife (e.g., Harris and Gallagher 1989; Maehr 1984; Reed et
al.1996). Animals are frequent victims of roadkill (Forman et al.
2003) as they move from one part of their range to another, or they
may avoid roads altogether (Gibeau and Heuer 1996), limiting their
habitat area and ability to fulfill certain needs. The impacts are
pervasive – a 16 foot-wide road removes approximately two acres of
habitat per mile of road, and it is further estimated that the
impacts of the road (noise and edge habitat) extend at least 600
meters beyond the road footprint on either side of a roadway (Forman
and Deblinger 2000).
In 2005, every state in the nation was required
to complete a State Wildlife Action Plan, intended to guide the
conservation of species of greatest conservation need and the
habitat they depend upon. White et al (2007) note that every state’s
plan identifies transportation infrastructure and associated traffic
as a threat to key and at-risk species in their state. Several state
plans specifically recommended greater coordination with state
transportation officials.
Early consideration of conservation needs in
the transportation planning process therefore offers an important
opportunity for addressing the threat of habitat fragmentation
(White et al 2007). Cramer and Bissonette (2007) report in their
nationwide survey of transportation and ecology professionals that
early incorporation of wildlife mitigation needs into the
transportation programming, planning and design process was
identified as the number one priority across all states in dealing
with roads and wildlife. In order to proactively integrate
conservation and transportation planning, planners must have access
to high quality conservation data that describes where important
conservation resources are located across the landscape, and what
the conservation needs are for different types of resources.
The 2005 federal transportation bill,
Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
(SAFETEA-LU) which funds the U.S. highway program through 2009,
specifically recognizes the need to incorporate conservation needs
with transportation planning, requiring that state transportation
agencies consult with state and federal land management, natural
resource and wildlife management agencies in the development of
long-range transportation plans (typically a 20-30 year time frame).
Each consultation is to include a comparison of the transportation
plan with conservation maps and recommend potential mitigation
actions.
Such consultation in long-range transportation
planning is an essential first step in laying the foundation for
early consideration of conservation needs and providing access to
natural resource data sets in the long-range planning process. While
still a very coarse level of planning, this is the first opportunity
for identifying potential conflicts with wildlife, setting the groundwork for further assessment
– and funding – in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan
(STIP), which sets transportation priorities over a 3-5 year time
frame (see Fig. 1 for flowchart of the transportation planning
process). At this stage of long-range planning, broad-scale wildlife
data, including conservation priorities as identified in the State
Wildlife Action Plan, should be referenced to highlight where
transportation projects intersect priority conservation areas.
SAFETEA-LU Links:
Defenders of Wildlife report:
SAFETEA-LU Conservation Provisions of Interest
Section 6001
Example of Integrative Long-Range Planning:
With SAFETEA-LU in place, states now have the
much-needed framework and regulatory mandate for considering
conservation needs in long-range transportation planning. However,
there is still a great need for timely integration of detailed and
comprehensive conservation data in the STIP. Although transportation
priorities are set well in advance of construction, most
land and wildlife agencies are not notified in the early stages of
project planning and design and, therefore, comment only during the
permit review and environmental assessment stages, when
transportation projects are well into the development process
(Cramer and Bissonette 2007). At this point, changes to the project
design typically result in significant delays, increased costs, and
offer little environmental benefit. The need to coordinate between
natural resource managers and transportation planners much earlier
in the project planning process was identified as a specific need in
a number of the State Wildlife Action Plans (White et al 2007) to
ensure that appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures are
implemented and located appropriately. Yet comprehensive data sets
at much more refined scale – appropriate for project-level planning
– are still lacking in many instances, and the processes for
ensuring early consideration of these data are not in place in most
states.
Resources
from Defenders of Wildlife’s Habitat and Highways Campaign
Linking Conservation and Transportation: Using the State Wildlife
Action Plans to Protect Wildlife from Road Impacts
Suggested Agenda for a Section 6001 Consultation Meeting
Getting
up to Speed – Transportation for Conservation Advocates
Other
Resources
State
Wildlife Action Plans

Figure 1:
Flowchart depicting the
alignment of State Wildlife Action Plans and the transportation
planning process, from long-range planning through construction,
including the wildlife data needed at each stage in the process
(Modified from White et al 2007).