Table of Contents Executive Summary 2
Download 181.31 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Alternatives Analysis and Discussion
- Temporary Barriers to Crossing
- Add Temporary Funneling Walls to Culverts
- Replace Existing Culverts
- Humans Moving Amphibians in Buckets
- Permanent Funnel Wall Construction
- Specific Culverts for Amphibians
Alternatives Table
Need 1 sentence qualifiers in footnote for maximum, etc Alternatives Analysis and DiscussionNo ActionThis alternative suggests the Agency of Transportation to continue with the same policies that they currently have. There would be no increase in spending or change in policy. This alternative does not address the problem. It does nothing to prevent amphibian mortality, raise public awareness, or raise the level of connectivity. Closing RoadsThis alternative addresses the problem and would prevent amphibian mortality, but only a couple times a year. It does nothing to address the problem during the rest of the year. It does nothing to increase connectivity. By closing the roads the public may be upset but it will cause them to question why this is happening, raising overall awareness of the topic. Temporary Barriers to CrossingBy building temporary barriers the mortality rate will be decreased almost completely. The barriers will prevent amphibians from getting onto the roads. They are cheap and easy to install but will need volunteer help with installation, upkeep and deconstruction. One problem with this alternative is connectivity. Barriers from the road with no crossing mechanism completely decrease connectivity. Warning SignsWarning Signs are fairly inexpensive and they have little upkeep. They are easy to implement and do not need much public support. This alternative does little to prevent amphibian mortality. It does nothing to prevent amphibians from going onto roads. It only makes a suggestion to drivers to be careful and does nothing to enforce driver safety. This alternative does not help with connectivity. Add Temporary Funneling Walls to CulvertsThis alternative will decrease mortality because it will direct amphibians toward the culvert entrance. It will increase the amphibian populations because less will be killed in the roads. However, the wall could confuse the amphibians that don’t move along the fence. This would make them likely to be predated on by birds. Habitats would be connected using this alternative, unless wear and tear happens to the silt fence. The aesthetics of a silt fence would be intermediate because they are used commonly for house construction. This alternative requires a great amount of labor. The fence must be constructed in the late spring or early summer and taken down in the fall and could be done by civilian groups such as boy scouts. The prices of the drift fences are minimal in comparison with a more permanent lipped concrete wall. Replace Existing CulvertsThis alternative would decrease amphibian mortality by making the culverts more accessible for amphibian to cross. This alternative would increase habitat connectivity and would have the potential to increase aesthetics. The public support would be minimal as well as the volunteers needed. In this case, existing culverts will need to be replaced anyway. The cost would depend on what alterations needed to be done and could range greatly. Humans Moving Amphibians in BucketsThis alternative would require a lot of volunteer work moving amphibians across the road. It would mean a decrease in mortality in the high migration points of the year, but could not guarantee 100% survival and does nothing for any other times throughout the year. It would have no affect on habitat connectivity, and would not affect aesthetics because nothing is being changed. It would be positive because it would encourage community interactions with each other and the environment. This alternative would cost nothing to the state but could have an effect on the traffic, such as causing people to slow down. Permanent Funnel Wall ConstructionThis alternative would decrease mortality and would be beneficial because it would not require much maintenance. This alternative would connect two habitats almost seamlessly. The aesthetics of a concrete wall would be negative. In order to get the funding for a project like this, public support would be needed. Volunteers would not be needed for this project. The cost of this project would be high. Specific Culverts for AmphibiansThese culverts would nearly eliminate mortality and would maximize habitat connectivity. Amphibian specific culverts are seamless which could have the potential to increase aesthetics. Public support would be needed to encourage VTRANS to install this type of culvert. No volunteers would be needed. The price of these culverts is high. Wilderness OverpassThe potential for a wilderness overpass could nearly eliminate mortality by naturally connecting two habitats. An overpass would be aesthetically pleasing to people who view nature as good. Public support for this project would be needed to encourage VTRANS funding. No volunteers would be needed. The cost would be very expensive taking into consideration that bridges cost more than digging a culvert. Download 181.31 Kb. Share with your friends:
|