Original source · versioned page text
2019-03-12 P&E Agenda - Item 5 - Attachment 2 - Koala Infrastructure & Feasibility Report
Very large file: it may take a few minutes
The original of this document is very large (31.9 MB). Opening the original or downloading it may take a few minutes. Please be patient and don't click again. The page text is quick to read. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Design considerations
• Several factors affect the ability of a crossing structure to facilitate wildlife movements (Glista et al. 2009)
o Location is vital, especially for smaller, less mobile species
▪ crossing structures should be placed in areas of suitable habitat
▪ passages implemented near continual disturbance (e.g., excessive human presence) are
less frequently used by several wildlife species
o Dimensions of structures are also important in designing passageways for vertebrates
▪ size and shape may determine crossing success
▪ relative openness may be more important than overall size
• Sediment and debris may be deposited during flow events and culverts must be maintained to allow free
passage for water and fauna.
• Thought must be given to flow conveyance when retrofitting existing culverts. Each culvert must be
checked to ensure that retrofitting will not significantly impact design flows prior to any retrofitting
exercise.
• When considering multi-species applications, culverts and exclusion fencing facilitate safe passage across
a road for a range of wildlife species but are not effective for frogs (Taylor & Goldingay 2003). Cunnington
et al. (2014) found that culverts alone do not reduce anuran mortality as anurans do not detect the
presence of the culvert and will continue across the road surface. However, installation of anuran-proof
fencing along both sides of the road reduced anuran mortality.
• Vegetation at the culvert entrance is important for encouraging use by small mammals and in providing
protection from predators (Taylor & Goldingay 2003; Clevenger et al. 2001). In the Australian context,
vegetation cover at passage entrances appears to make passages more attractive to native prey species
and less attractive to feral predators (Finegan 1997; Hunt et al. 1987).
• The inclusion of a natural substrate within a crossing structure can provide continuity of habitat and may
encourage animals to pass (Glista et al. 2009).
• Road-related factors have the greatest influence on mammal passage at culverts, whereas structural and
landscape attributes of culverts are lesser predictors of culvert use (Clevenger et al. 2001; Yanes et al.
1995; Rodriguez et al. 1996).
• It is important to have at least one culvert or passage within an individual's home range to ensure cross-
road connectivity and gene flow (Gerlach & Musolf 2000), it is therefore important to understand the
average home range size of target species to inform the frequency of crossing infrastructure (Clevenger
et al. 2001).
• Use of the relatively large underpasses could be enhanced for smaller species by the inclusion of small
mammal-specific features including hollow logs and pipes along the open floor of the underpass and
raised shelves could be incorporated into existing culverts and underpasses to encourage increased use
by small species (Bond & Jones 2008).
• Bliss-Ketchum et al. (2016) studied the effect of ecological light pollution on animal usage of a bridge
under-road passage structure. The study suggested that artificial light within the underpass was a barrier
to use by some species but not for others. Manipulation of spectra may facilitate use by fauna and
artificial light could be used to influence movement (Bliss-Ketchum et al. 2016).
3.1.3. Overpasses
Overpasses for wildlife are a ‘green’ bridge used in areas where an underpass is not feasible and designed
primarily for fauna that are unlikely to use a culvert crossing. Overpasses can maintain the connectivity of
horizontal ecological flows across the landscape, are open, quieter than underpasses and culverts, maintain
ambient conditions (rainfall, temperature and light) and can serve as both passageways for wildlife and
Koala Infrastructure Audit & Feasibility Report Page 12
Noosa Council
17SUN-0087/1700860
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Very large file: the download may take a few minutes. If you are on mobile data, it is best to wait until you are on Wi-Fi.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.