Highway Wildlife Crossings Mean More Animals, More Hunting, More Meat, More Fur

On Election Day Fremont County residents will vote to advise their county commissioners whether or not to support wildlife crossings on US Highway 20.

Join sportsman organizations like the Idaho Deer Alliance, Safari Club International Idaho Chapter, Idaho State Bowhunters, Idaho Trappers Association, and the Idaho Wildlife Federation and vote in favor of wildlife crossings.

To accommodate more traffic from a growing residential population in the area and visitation to Yellowstone National Park, along with increased freight from Idaho Falls up to Bozeman and I-90, Idaho Transportation Department plans to widen the highway for much of the 40 mile stretch through Island Park. With $197.4 million in highway projects from Chester to the Montana State Line, wider highways and increased traffic will affect long-term population viability of elk, moose, and deer herds and some fur bearing species if movement patterns are blocked. One option to remove such migration barriers is to construct safe wildlife crossings.

Unfortunately, the discussion about wildlife crossings on US 20 has devolved into a political fight with some conspiratorial tones of opposition. The ultimate loser in this fight will be Idaho’s game- if they can’t make it across roads, the long-term viability of herds is at risk, as recent studies find that migration routes are learned from other animals in a herd.

So, we decided we’d clear the air and address some misinformation and concerns we’ve heard about highway crossings.

Building safe wildlife crossings just to keep animals from getting hit by cars seems excessive. While wildlife crossings do save human lives and keep wildlife safe, their most important function is providing habitat permeability- the ease of movement of animals through an area by removing barriers. The Sand Creek elk herd, which migrates from west Yellowstone down beyond Rexburg, is the largest herd in our country. There are over 12,000 elk crossings on US 20. GPS collar data shows elk stopping at pinch point migration spots along US 20 and turning away due to traffic and noise. The elk return days or weeks later and may or may not cross during a time of year when constant migration is critical to survival. Saving human life is important, but these crossings remove migration barriers too. That means more animals and more hunting opportunity.

*Collar data showing elk movement, highlighting hesitation to cross US 20. Source: IDFG*

Surely there are “better” and more “cost effective ways to save wildlife? Incorrect. Many have suggested animal detection systems and a lower speed limit to help reduce vehicle collisions, but studies show that these systems end up costing more because wildlife crossings have a lifespan of 75 years and in North Idaho detection systems have proven to be far less effective. As well, with the expansion of US 20 planned, these systems will do nothing to help wildlife migrate uninhibited by traffic.

There will be a “buffer” near the crossings and their fences where no hunting or trapping is allowed. Incorrect. The Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG) has publicly stated there are no plans to limit these activities and no interest to do so. There are five existing wildlife crossings in Idaho built specifically for wildlife. Not a single one has any sort of restrictions associated.

The Forest Service will shut down roads near the crossings and fencing. Incorrect. These projects are on Transportation Dept. property. The USFS has publicly stated that the Caribou Targhee National Forest would not revisit travel plans, and therefore require that all public access, including all legal roads and trails, remain open with any plans of highway expansion.

The crossings and fences will hinder access to public lands. Incorrect. We’ve heard the fencing will keep people from crossing the highway on snowmobiles and other OHVs and this concern was raised at a community event. Such crossing is illegal anyways. So, be careful who you admit to that a proposed plan would limit your illegal activity.

The crossings and fences will close off existing public and private roads. Incorrect. We were told fencing will cross existing private and public roads, forcing the construction and use of “frontage roads” that go around the fence. In fact where the fencing crosses a road, a double cattle guard would be built on any roads that may be crossed.

Funding the crossings contributes to the national debt. Incorrect. The federal funds that would pay for the crossings will come from existing revenue from the federal fuels tax.

The funding for the crossings can be used for other projects. Not necessarily. The federal money is coming from the Federal Highway Administration. Deciding not to utilize these funds does not mean the money will go to another project in Island Park. This money that would be used in Fremont County will be put back into the Idaho Transportation Department fund and will most likely be invested outside Fremont County.

The fences will drive down property values. Speculative. To date no wildlife crossings and their fences have affected property values. The homes in question are already looking down on a highway and may be looking down at a four or three lane expansion soon with more dead animals.

The fences will be 30 feet high. Incorrect. Most wildlife fencing is eight feet high. These particular fences can be built in the barrow ditch on the side of the road, and can be disguised or lowered through important scenic viewsheds.

Predators sit on crossings waiting for prey. Incorrect. This behavior has never been observed or documented on the hundreds of wildlife crossings in the US and Canada. Predators will use crossings, however, the case can be made that the unwillingness of game to cross highways without over/underpasses keeps them at risk of greater predation risk.

Island Park wildlife crossings are one part of a conspiracy cooked by environmentalists to “re-wild”, to fulfill “Agenda 21”, create a Yellowstone to Yukon devoid of people, and so on. Incorrect. This, unfortunately, is something we’ve heard far too often. First, this proposal was created by the Idaho Transportation Department, not an environmental nonprofit. Second, wildlife crossings are common around the world as effective migration tools minimizing vehicle collisions. Third, the US 20 expansion and wildlife crossings together seem to encourage human development and presence, opposite many claims that this somehow fits into a conspiracy to remove people from the landscape. Lastly, folks… these are simply bridges or underpasses- they don’t have an agenda.

So please, vote for more animals, more fur, more meat, more hunting. Vote yes for wildlife crossings.