UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA CRUZ
VASCO ROAD PERMANENT WILDLIFE FENCE & CROSSINGS:
PROJECT DESIGN AND ANALYSIS
A Senior Project-Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction
of the requirements for the degree of
BACHELOR OF ARTS
in
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES & E CONOMICS COMBINED
by
Adam Vali Radpour
December 2011
ADVISOR(S): Zdravka Tzankova, PhD, Environmental Studies Department
ABSTRACT: This project report will outline the planning and construction of permanent
wildlife fencing and crossings currently being implemented along a high-volume traffic corridor
of Vasco Road, in between Brentwood and Livermore. These fences and crossings are designed
to protect and sustain special-status species such as California tiger salamander, San Joaquin kit
fox, California red-legged frog, American Badger, and San Francisco gartersnake. Although the
concepts of wildlife crossings and protection fencing along roads are not unique here, the
specific design and engineering of the plans for these crossings, for these aforementioned species
is original. Our company works to monitor fence construction and ensure work done matches
the general plans.
KEYWORDS: Vasco Road, Wildlife fencing, Wildlife crossing, Wildlife jumpout, California
tiger Salamander, San Joaquin kit fox, California red-legged frog
I claim the copywrite to this document but give permission for the Environmental Studies department at UCSC to
share it with the UCSC community.
____________________________________________
Student signature
________________________
Date
Vasco Road Permanent Wildlife Fence and Crossings
Project and Design Analysis
Prepared by:
Adam Vali Radpour
Table of Contents
I.
Acknowledgements…………………………………….i
II.
Key Terms……………………………………………...ii
III.
Introductory Background and Project Description……..1
IV. Permanent Wildlife Fence and Crossing Description…. 3
V.
Concluding Remarks……………………………………4
VI. Bibliography.....................................................................6
VII. Figures…………………………………………………..7
Acknowledgements
I wish to extend thanks and gratitude to a number of individuals for allowing me to be in the
position I am today. To begin with, I would like to thank each member of my family for their
own unique skills and encouraging advice for me in life: Farhad, Zohreh, Rachelle, and Roxanne,
you are all scholars and wonderful human beings. Next, I would like to give acknowledgement
to Chris Krohn, the UCSC Internship Coordinator, first for helping me land the opportunity to
work for Condor Country, and then for guiding me every step of the way. I will also give great
thanks to Zdravka Tzankova, my faculty sponsor, for taking me on as a student during the
summer and for her invaluable time and counsel to my work. Finally, I would like to send grand
appreciation to each and every employee at Condor Country Consulting, Inc. Sean and Wendy
Dexter, for giving me the chance to grow as an intern; Felix Ratcliff and John Michel-Ruddy,
UCSC alumni who coached me on and provided great knowledge of the field and natural world;
Bob Bartholomew, served as a great mentor and friend to me during my stay in Martinez;
Melissa Odell and Rhiannon Klingonsmith, two peas in a pod, and great support for me as staff
biologists; Ted Robertson, I envy your wilderness survival and pioneering skills, as well as your
unrivaled comprehension of avian and botanical sciences; and lastly myself, for not giving up
during the toughest times of my life, and with the support of my family, persevering through
academia to fulfill my dream and earn a Bachelor of Arts degree in Environmental Studies.
Key Terms
CCCI……………………………………...Condor Country Consulting, Inc.
VRSIP.........................................................Vasco Road Safety Improvement Project
HCP............................................................Habitat Conservation Plan
CTS.............................................................California Tiger Salamander
BUOW........................................................Burrowing Owl
SJKF............................................................San Joaquin Kit Fox
ROW...........................................................Right-of-Way
NES.............................................................Natural Environment Study
BA...............................................................Biological Assessment
TWLF..........................................................Temporary Wildlife Fencing
PWLF..........................................................Permanent Wildlife Fencing
ESA.............................................................Endangered Species Act
SWHA.........................................................Swainson’s Hawk
WFL............................................................Western Fence Lizard
BWG...........................................................Band-winged Grasshopper
I. Introductory Background and Project Description
The Vasco Road Safety Improvement Project (VRSIP) was initially proposed by the
Contra Costa County Public Works Department, and is designed to improve safety on a
commuter road between Brentwood and Livermore where serious-injury and fatal accidents
frequently occur. Within the general plan for construction in the 2.5 mile project site are
proposals to connect existing truck climbing lanes, median barrier installations, and increasing
sight distance on road curves. These measures are all designed to reduce roadway dangers,
including aggressive merging, head-on collisions, and fatalities. However, significant impacts
affecting various special-status and protected species were found to be of adverse effect upon
completion of the Biological Assessment (BA). Road mortality surveys were taken when
compiling the BA to define the volume and description of species using the road for a pathway.
It was found that California tiger salamander (CTS), California red-legged frog (CRLF), and San
Joaquin kit fox (SJKF) were among the top species using the road as a crossing. Coincidentally,
the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) necessitates the implementation of large wildlife crossings,
a minimum of five feet in diameter, to be spaced along the project area at least every mile.
Additionally, required are small mammal crossings, 18-48 inches in diameter, to be spaced along
the same plane every 1000 feet. The President and Principal Biologist of Condor Country
Consulting, Inc (CCCI) then engineered a design for a wildlife fencing that would span across
the entire project site, on both sides of the road, connecting to each wildlife crossing. The
general plan and design has already been submitted to Contra Costa County and has been
approved to begin construction. CCCI biologists and biological technicians, including myself,
have taken intimate roles in monitoring fence and crossing installation to guarantee that work
done matches the blueprints and general plan precisely (See Figures 18-20). Temporary wildlife
fencing (TWLF) had been installed following project approval, and had required general repair
and maintenance from the elements until the permanent wildlife fencing (PWLF) was erected in
its place (See Figures 13-16). On top of that, due to the presence of Western burrowing owl
(BUOW) in the project area, surveys for BUOW burrows must be conducted within the right-ofway (ROW), and outside the ROW of the construction zone. Inside the ROW is 80 feet from the
construction site, and anywhere located 80 feet further than that is considered outside the ROW.
Protocol states that if a burrow is greater than four inches in diameter with signs of pellet and
whitewash, then it must be recorded using GPS and observed from a distance for one hour in
case the owl returns. If the case occurs where an active BUOW site is recorded inside the ROW,
then strict protocol must be adhered to. If the owl does not return, then proper environmental
management practice is followed by collapsing the burrow. The technique consists of placing a
tube with a diameter greater than four inches into the burrow, and digging around it with a shovel
or pickaxe until the hole is too small for a suitable BUOW burrow. The key to this procedure is
ensuring that the other end of the tube is above ground such that any possible organism in the
burrow can climb out. In the case that no species are detected in the burrows, CCCI staff then
buries the remaining burrow with the uncovered rubble. If a BUOW site is confirmed outside
the ROW, then the location must be recorded and included in the report, without any further
action. Another aspect of the project required widening lanes on the bridges at the north and
south ends of the project area, which was a popular nesting and perching area for various
migratory birds, including House finch (HOFI), Black phoebe, and Loggerhead shrike. Our job
was to check the netting around and underneath these bridges, which were designed for keeping
nesting birds out, for nests. These various tasks were what our staff and I were dealing with on a
tri-weekly basis. But as time went on, the results of our work became increasingly apparent.
II. Permanent Wildlife Fence and Crossing Description
The HCP regarding VRSIP states that wildlife fencing must be erected along the entirety
of both sides of the road within the project site in order to prevent organisms from using the
highway to travel across. All wildlife fencing is to be constructed at the locations outlined in the
Wildlife Crossing & Fence Plan, in accordance to the Standard Specifications, as directed by
Nolte Engineering. There are three different types of permanent fencing designs being used,
each accommodating the various roadways and terrains.
Wildlife Fence “A” is used for the majority of length on both sides of the road. Standing
six feet above ground, chain link fencing was installed with chain link fence fabric and lined
with hardware cloth, secured by bottom tension wires along the fence. The galvanized t-posts
used were gray in color equipped with anchor plates. The PVC pipes which are lined across the
chain link were split on one wall of the pipe and secured at the top of the hardware cloth, such
that there were no gaps between the cloth and pipe. The PVC cap is UV-protected and black in
color. Additional security for the hardware cloth was provided by plastic UV-protected ties that
are placed at 36 inch intervals (See Figure 12).
Wildlife Fence “B” was constructed on the retaining wall at designated intervals along
road. The posts for this fence stand nine feet above ground, constructed in similar style to PWLF
“A”. The chain link fence fabric runs from the top of the fence post to the top of the post pocket.
Flush with the top of the retaining wall is where the hardware cloth coated mesh fabric was
mounted (See Figure 11).
Wildlife Fence “C” post was constructed upon the roadside concrete barriers, at
designated intervals outlined in the Phase 1 Safety Improvements. Once again, the construction
of this type fence is similar to that of PWLF “A” and “B”. The chain link fencing was installed
in post pockets located at the top of the concrete barriers (See Figure 11). This style of fence
was used least throughout the project.
Directional fencing at Wildlife Crossings & CTS jumpouts have been strategically
designed and located at points where existing activity for protected wildlife has been recorded.
A galvanized T-post is used to support a galvanized tension wire, attached to a hardware cloth
coated mesh fabric using tension wire clips. The posts were planned to be standing two inches
above ground with an 18 inch underground support (See Figures 23 & 24).
Along the 2.5 mile road, box culverts of various sizes were used as wildlife
undercrossings, as required by the HCP. The project called for six 5 foot square undercrossings
to be spaced approximately every 1600 feet. Furthermore, seventeen 20-24 inch diameter
undercrossings were constructed roughly every 600 feet. All of these features are up to standard
according to the latest science and regulations.
III. Concluding Remarks
This project was not only the bread and butter for CCCI, but was also where I had
dedicated the majority of my full-time hours to. Daily, as well as weekly reports needed to be
submitted to Condor Country and Contra Costa County for review. Originally I had been
contributing to the reports via my field notes taken, until eventually becoming their sole author.
With each passing week during my internship, great results were shown and documented. The
foreseeable results in which I had predicted during the earlier weeks had finally been realized,
and my contributions to the project are greatly noticeable. There were two significant cases in
which I had had noteworthy and memorable accomplishments regarding the VRSIP. There was
an instance where I was performing BUOW and SJKF surveys independently and came across a
site with three or four seemingly active BUOW burrows, all with sign present (See Figures 28-
30). I had taken photographs of the site and presented them to CCCI, who confirmed them as
legitimate BUOW traces. When I got the coordinates using GPS however, I realized that the
burrow den was located outside the ROW, so no collapsing was required. The location was
simply charted and included in the reports. Even though it was located outside the ROW, my
finding was of the greatest magnitude of the duration of my internship and of anyone else I had
known there. Another situation transpired when I was conducting the fence checks and
sustaining the TWLF for repairs. It was in my knowledge that one of our field biologists had
discovered a rare strain of atriplex alongside the road in the project site, close to the northern
bridge. Since San Joaquin Spearscale (Atriplex joaquiniana) is a protected plant species, it is
required by habitat conversancy laws to do all possible to preserve its life. Upon sighting of the
rare plant, the contracted construction firm was alerted and an orange ESA protection fence was
raised for a buffer around the plant. Nonetheless, while I was conducting my survey, I had
noticed that the ESA fence was run down by heavy machinery with tractor threads surrounding
the plant, which was buried under 6-12 inches of dirt and rubble, destroyed (See Figures 25-27).
I had taken several photographs and sent them to CCCI headquarters for our staff biologists to
assess. They had congratulated me on my find and assured me that Tiechert, the construction
company, would receive some sort of penalty from Fish and Wildlife Service.
Currently, the VRSIP is nearing completion of Phase I of the project. The PWLF will be
entirely installed, and the TWLF removed. My contributions to this project include maintaining
and repairing the TWLF, monitoring PWLF installation to ensure correct implementation,
surveying inside and outside the ROW for BUOW and SJKF burrows, managing bird nests in
nets under the bridge, and generating daily and weekly reports for our company and the
contractors. Completion of this project will ensure lasting protection for multiple species.
Bibliography
Alvarez, Jeff. Wildlife Biologist, The Wildlife Project. April 2009
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2000. Guidelines for Assessing the
Effects of Proposed Projects on Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plants and
Natural Communities.
Dexter, Wendy K. Natural Environment Study: Vasco Road Safety Improvement
Project, Contra Costa County. California Department of Transportation. July
2009.
Meese, R. J., F. M. Shilling, and J. F. Quinn. 2007. Wildlife Crossings Guidance
Manual. California Department of Transportation, Davis, California, USA.
Figures
Fig 1: Southern end of project site
Fig 2: SE end
Fig 3: Southern sector from North end
Fig 4: SE sector
Fig 5: North end of project site
Fig 6: SW sector viewing North
Fig 7: SW sector viewing North
Fig 8: Central area viewing East
Fig 9: Windmills on NE hills
Fig 10: TWLF in Staging Area
Fig 11: PWLF and Median
Fig 12: PWLF and TWLF
Fig 13: TWLF Damage (Lower)
Fig 14: TWLF Damage (Upper)
Fig 15: TWLF Repaired
Fig 16: TWLF Repaired
Fig 17: Southern PWLF
Fig 19: PWLF Construction (b)
Fig 18: PWLF Construction (a)
Fig 20: PWLF Construction (c)
Fig 21: SJKF Jumpout
Fig 22: CTS Jumpout (a)
Fig 23: CTS Jumpout (b)
Fig 24: CTS Jumpout (c)
Fig 25: Destroyed ESA Fence (a)
Fig 26: Destroyed ESA Fence (b)
Fig 27: Repaired ESA Fence
Fig 28: BUOW Whitewash and Pellet
Fig 29: BUOW Burrow
Fig 30: BUOW Whitewash and Pellet (b)
Fig 31: Raptor Observation (Swarovski Scope)
Fig 33: WFL
Fig 32: SWHA (adult)
Fig 34: BWG Along for the Ride