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

2. 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

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

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

5. Solutions at federal level: norms e. g
Solutions at federal level: norms e.g. SN ) 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

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

7. 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

8. 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
Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

9. 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
Dimensions which can be implemented
Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

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

11. Approach
Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

12. Locations of the underpassesNL A
Agenda Research objectives Study areas and methods Results Discussion Summary

13. 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

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

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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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

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