[MPWG] Pollinators, Roads and Corridors

[Megan_Haidet at fws.gov]

You may be interested in the flurry of discussion about pollinators, roads 
and corridors on the main PCA list.  

Here are a few of the last posts: 

Some states are already pursuing Corridor for Wildlife Programs.  Of 
course, safety will always be a concern.  
RESEARCH is needed on behalf of pollinators, nesting birds, and small 
mammals that corridors can indeed accommodate. 
The FHWA wants to do more research.....but we NEED YOUR HELP. 
  
Please note the attached one page that explains. 
Please take the 4 easy steps to registering your concerns and needs for 
research on corridor stewardship.  Please remember 
these corridors can be homes to endangered plant species as well as 
natural community remnants when less mowing occurs. 
  
I thank you and my Natural Environment Team thanks you.  We NEED public 
input to get research funding.  Good luck to us all!!! 
Bonnie



Bonnie L. Harper-Lore 
Restoration Ecologist 
Office of Environment, HEPN-30 
Federal Highway Administration 
360 Jackson Street, Ste. 500 
St. Paul, MN  55101 
651-291-6104 

Great dialogue on resource management and lack of along roadways.   Many 
on this list serve are aware of new, innovative vegetation management 
practices and techniques, if not practicing them.   For a number of 
reasons, transportation corridor vegetation management programs are 
designed without much consideration of ecological associations.  The 
impact on flora and faunal relationships within parallel or transected 
wildlife travel corridors is often sacrificed in the name of “safety and 
liability”.  Defensible or not, perceived or real s safety and liability 
issues trump natural resource protection/management practices in managed 
landscapes.  As Bonnie noted, 'trees and automobile collisions ' have 
dominated planning and operations.  (usually a bad thing when lawyers and 
vegetation mix)   
 
This scenario seems to be slowly changing for the better.  The linear 
nature of highway systems has visibly exacerbated the spread of many 
invasive plant species.    Public acceptance of the threat of invasives 
and links to  transportation corridors, urban land management, development 
is relatively recent.    Loss of biodiversity/habitat is a strong argument 
for control and management of invasive plant communities.  This developing 
consensus is significant and should be aligned with the benefits of energy 
conservation to promote applied landscape ecology in general.  In this 
case, the design of alternative, native species plant communities and 
innovative management regimes for transportation right of ways can also 
control the spread of invasives.   I'm seeing encouraging signs from 
environmental and operations managers in New York State DOT Regions 2 and 
5 in collaborations with private sector, universities and NGOs such as the 
Adirondack Park Invasive Plant Program.    FHA and some state DOTs have 
taken the lead in promotion of (ecological) roadside vegetation management 
that addresses safety and biodiversity.  Implementation won't occur 
overnight nor will the liability arguments be resolved any time soon. 
 What "we" can do is get more of this work on the ground in the form of d 
demonstration projects, field trials, project briefs and good case 
studies.  The next step is to integrate the best into operational 
programs.  I also believe that most all transportation professionals want 
to do best they can with the resources at their disposal.  Biologists and 
ecologists need to develop these new tools and help integrate them into 
the system.   
 
Paul R. Fuhrmann 
ecology and environment, inc. 
368 Pleasantview Drive 
Lancaster, New York 14086 
Tel.  716 6848060 ext. 2876 
Fax. 716 684 0844 
www.ene.com  

This is fascinating, thank you for your interesting story of highway 
mowing!

As environmental consultants, my husband and I have worked on rare 
butterfly 
and rare plant surveys, as well as surveys of the highly invasive species, 

cogongrass.  We pay attention to what happens on roadsides.

What I have observed is that in the southeastern US, because of a 
reluctance 
to use burn management in these states, most of the natural areas are 
grown 
up so much as to be virtually devoid of native grasses and forbs.  Areas 
that have not been developed, put into agriculture, silviculture, or 
"improved" for grazing, are almost always overgrown and unsuitable for an 
enormous diversity of grasses and grassland species that used to make the 
Southeast one of the wealthiest areas in the country for biodiversity.

Looking for grassland that would support the rare Arogos Skipper, we found 

almost nothing throughout the southeast, aside from a few powerline cuts. 
The exception was a few beautiful wetland areas that are probably 
developed 
now, or will be soon, because of the change in the Corps of Engineer's 
definition of what a wetland is a few years back.

In Georgia in particular, even the powerline cuts were farmed, with 
legumes 
and other exotics seeded in to attract deer for hunters.  Indeed, the 
problem of attracting deer to roadsides may be a symptom of the lack of 
open 
habitat anywhere else.  Along the southeastern coastal plain, which was 
historically basically a grassland/prairie ecosystem, many species which 
were formerly abundant are gone and disappearing.

We have found that roadside (and powerline) mowing is very helpful for 
biodiversity in that it creates grassland refugia for many species.  On 
the 
other hand, habitat management to promote open native grasslands would be 
highly preferable to roadside mowing!

One of the primary means of spreading of Cogongrass, an exotic invasive 
which is a menace to biodiversity as well as an economic menace to 
silviculture and grazing, is roadside mowing.  And when roadsides are 
scraped and planted with turf, the environmental damage is compounded. 
 Turf 
can come with cogongrass, is inherently an exotic species, and takes up 
the 
space that our natives might otherwise thrive in.

The DOT policy of planting wildflowers is another issue.  In Florida 
roadsides are often planted with non-native wildflowers, which are pretty, 

but also take the place of native species.  It is basically substituting a 

wildflower farm for the natives that might otherwise grow on roadsides. 
 The 
wildflowers may also tend to attract wildlife, which is killed by cars. 
 The 
point about roadsides being a sink for wildlife is a great question.  It 
seems that pollinators such as butterflies and native bees and wasps, and 
their predators, such as dragonflies and birds, and grazers, such as 
rodents 
and deer, and other wildlife favoring open land, including armadillos, and 

all of their predators, such as owls and hawks and panthers, are all 
attracted to open roadsides, where they are likely to meet their death by 
automobile.

It seems as though the millions of acres of roadside land could be a great 

resource for biodiversity, if designed and managed properly.  However, 
management would have to be done in a wise and individualized manner, 
because a general prescription or policy for a large region would not work 

with the variety of habitats roads traverse.  DOT certainly has the 
financial resources, perhaps just not the collective will, to do this.

Maria Minno
Gainesville, FL 

Megan Haidet
Communications Coordinator
Plant Conservation Alliance 
US Fish & Wildlife Service
4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Suite 750
Arlington, VA  22203
Phone: 703.358.2120
Fax: 703.358.2276
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20060906/b0e59984/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: FNWA - TEAM & STEP 2006.doc
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 26624 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.plantconservation.org/pipermail/mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org/attachments/20060906/b0e59984/attachment.obj>