Research project VSS 2011/602: Design of fauna underpasses IENE Lyon (F) / 31.8 – 2.9.2016 Antonio Righetti, B+S AG

Research team: B+S AG / Cécile Eicher, Annalina Wegelin, Antonio Righetti FORNAT AG / Daniela Keller, Pia Schütz, Conny Thiel-Egenter Elke Peters-Ostenberg, Michael Hennenberg (field work in Germany) Financial support: VSS - research and standardization in the field of road and transportation Federal office of environment

Agenda Research objectives Study area and methods Results Discussion Summary Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Research objectives Define standard dimensions for underpasses in supraregional corridors Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Solutions at federal level: norms e. g Solutions at federal level: norms e.g. SN 640694) and guidelines (DETEC, FEDRO) 45 m +/- 5 m 25 m +/- 5 m which provide details on: the width, measures to reduce light emission and noise, appropriate soil to be used, integration of ecological networks, modifications based on effectiveness evaluations additionally: a fauna restoration concept for supraregional corridors was developed Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Pfister et a., 1999 Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Research objectives Define standard dimensions for underpasses in supraregional corridors Target species were ungulates like red deer and wild boar (extending populations, migration, connect populations) Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Research objectives Define standard dimensions for underpasses in supraregional corridors Target species were ungulates like red deer and wild boar (extending populations, migration, connect populations) Complement the norm SN 640694 Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Research objectives Define standard dimensions for underpasses in supraregional corridors Target species: ungulates like red deer and wild boar (extending populations, migrations, connect populations) Complement the norm SN 640694 Dimensions which can be implemented Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Measures??? width * height openness = length L W H Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Approach Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Locations of the underpasses NL A Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Methods Field study on 24 underpasses . Interviews with local experts . Trail cameras . Interviews with local experts . Existing data  data of fauna crossing the underpasses, disturbances, wildlife density, surrounding forest areas, guiding structures statistical analyses by pairwise Pearson correlations, linear regression models and regression trees Extensive literature study D NL A Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Use of underpasses by ungulates (24h) Short underpasses Number of crossings Openness Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Use of underpasses by ungulates (24h) Short underpasses Number of crossings Height Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Distance other passage (-0.23) Width (-0.25) Crossings ungulates Crossings ungulates day ungulates night Crossings roe deer red deer wild boar Surface forest 2km (0.53) Length (0.26) Surface forest 2km (0.57) Height (0.29) Surface forest 2km (0.81) Guiding struct. 100m (0.42) Disturbances sum (-0.33) Age (0.24) Disturbances sum (-0.27) Length (-0.48) Surface forest 5km (0.40) Age (0.23) Distance other passage (-0.23) Width (-0.25) Surface forest 5km (-0.26) Surface forest 5km (0.43) Surface forest 2km (0.29) Width (-0.21) Disturbances sum (-0.23) Length (-0.23) Length (0.18) Distance other passage (0.34) Inaccessibility (0.29) Height (0.14) Surface forest 2km (0.19) Distance other passage (0.20) Distance other passage (-0.15) Inaccessibility (-0.27) Length (-0.24) Guiding struct. 100m (0.10) Height (0.15) Guiding struct. 100m (0.18) Inaccessibility (0.12) Age (0.26) Disturbances sum (-0.22) Surface forest 5km (0.06) Guiding struct. 100m (-0.08) Age (0.13) Age (0.09) Width (-0.23) Openness (-0.21) Openness (-0.05) Inaccessibility (0.07) Surface forest 5km (0.10) Width (-0.09) Openness (-0.22) Age (0.20) Length (-0.04) Openness (-0.05) Height (0.09) Openness (0.08) Guiding struct. 100m (0.21) Width (-0.19) Distance other passage (0.03) Width (-0.04) Inaccessibility (-0.07) Surface forest 2km (0.08) Height (-0.20) Height (-0.19) Inaccessibility (-0.02) Surface forest 5km (-0.04) Openness (-0.03) Disturbances sum (-0.15) Distance other passage (-0.15) Agenda Aim of the study Study areas Methods Results Discussion Summary

Literature Most studies include ungulates Most species clearly prefer overpasses rather than underpasses Openness . roe deer: >0.75 to > 1.4 (>1.75, VSS) . red deer (Wapiti) : >1.5 (2, VSS) Height is mainly told as the most important measure, minimum can raise till 10m Important are also disturbances and distance to the forest Red deer (Wapiti) is the most sensitive species Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Openness Width/ Height Recommendations/guidelines for underpasses in other countries along superregional corridors and the target species red deer Country Openness Width/ Height Authors Germany "15.6" 50 / 10  FGSV [14] France - 40 / ? In preparation (J. Carsignol CETE de l‘est, oral com.) Austria "6.3" 50 / 4 FSV [15] Czech Republik >8 Hlaváč und Anděl [22] Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Discussion Few data Short surviving time (quite) any statistical evidence Lack of migrating animals Expert knowhow and opinion Experiences in Switzerland with the planning of underpasses, authorities, engineers Agenda Aim of the study Study areas Methods Results Discussion Summary

H ≥ 5m L W width * height Openness = length Width * ≥ 4.5m Openness = ≥ 4.5m +/-0.5m = length L W H ≥ 5m Agenda Aim of the study Study areas Methods Results Discussion Summary

Summary  complements for SN 640694 In supraregional corridors – without evidential reason against – overpasses should be built. Underpasses should be located in forests or at least be connected with them by functional guiding structures. The underpasses should have a minimum openness of 4.5 +/-0.5 and a height of 5m. In and around the underpasses any disturbances should be avoided. Inside the underpasses the growth of vegetation should be possible. Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

Thank you for your attention! Any questions? Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary