Region 4 – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Long Range Transportation Plan

Executive Summary

Southeast Region

February 2015

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4 ES-i

Front page photo credits (clockwise from top left): Paul Tritaik, J.N. “Ding” Darling NWR; Cristina Pastore, J.N. “Ding”

Darling NWR; Steve Suder, Alligator River NWR; Paul Tritaik, J.N. “Ding” Darling NWR; Joe Saenz, Black Bayou Lake

NWR.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4 ES-1

Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION TO THE FWS REGION 4 LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

The Southeast Region (Region 4) of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS, the Service) has

initiated the development of its first Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). With the assistance of

the Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD) of the Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA), the Service’s Southeast Region (FWS Region 4) is developing a twenty-year plan for the

preservation, enhancement, operations and maintenance of its transportation assets across all of its

national wildlife refuges and fish hatcheries in the southeastern states and U.S. outlying areas. The

FWS regional boundaries are shown in Figure 1. Region 4 states, territories, and station locations

are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 1: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Region Boundaries

This plan accomplishes the following:

· Assesses the current and future conditions of the Service’s transportation assets.

· Determines transportation needs, as well as the identification of those potential projects and

policies to address those needs.

· Establishes priorities based on project performance, available funding, and coordination

opportunities with other federal, state, and local agencies.

Prior to the commencement of this regional plan, the development of a national level long-range

transportation plan for the Fish and Wildlife Service was initiated. The primary purpose of the national

plan was to define the overall transportation policy direction for the entire Service as well as for

individual regions. Similar to Region 4, many of the other regions across the country have been
ES-2 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4

completing plans of their own. These plans will aid in the Service’s mission to “work with others to

conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of

the American people”1 by assisting each region with the development of a safe, efficient, and

sustainable transportation system on Service lands.

Figure 2: Region 4 States and Stations

This Long Range Transportation Plan will assist Region 4 in determining its many transportation

needs, prioritizing transportation projects to best utilize the funds currently available to the Service,

and aid in the development of partnerships with outside agencies for coordinated planning

opportunities. This plan also will help to more formally integrate transportation planning into the

refuges’ comprehensive conservation plans (CCPs) and the fish hatcheries’ comprehensive hatchery

management plans (CHMPs) to make better use of their existing planning processes.

MISSION AND GOALS

The Mission of the FWS Region 4 LRTP is to support the Service’s larger national mission by

connecting people to fish, wildlife, and their habitats through strategic implementation of

transportation programs.

The goals of this Region 4 transportation plan reflect the six basic categories defined in the FWS

National LRTP document. Each of the enhanced FWS Region 4 goals includes distinct objectives

that explain how the Service will accomplish each goal. The FWS Region 4 LRTP’s goals and

objectives are detailed below.

1

 http://www.fws.gov/help/about_us.html
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4 ES-3

Goal 1 – Access, Mobility, and Connectivity: Ensure that units open to public visitation have

adequate access, mobility, and connectivity for all potential users, including underserved,

underrepresented, and disadvantaged populations.

Goal 2 – Asset Management: Provide a financially sustainable transportation system to

satisfy current and future land management needs in the face of a changing climate.

Goal 3 – Coordinated Opportunities: Seek partnered transportation solutions that support the

Service’s mission, maximize the utility of Service

resources, and provide mutual benefits to the Service

and its external partners.

Goal 4 – Environment: Ensure that the transportation

program helps to conserve and enhance fish, wildlife,

and plant resources and their habitats.

Goal 5 – Safety: Provide a transportation system that

ensures visitors traveling to and within Service lands

arrive at their destinations safely.

Goal 6 – Visitor Experience: Create and sustain

enjoyable and welcoming transportation experiences

for all visitors.

REGION 4 BACKGROUND

Region 4 is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s largest region in the country, in terms of the number

of transportation assets it contains. Region 4 contains 128 national wildlife refuges and 17 national

fish hatcheries, comprising approximately 3.59 million acres of land and water across ten states and

two territories: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North

Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee, as well as Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Of the

128 refuges, 113 are open to the public for visitation at specified time periods throughout the year; all

17 hatcheries allow public visitation as well. Sixteen of the refuges were specifically established for

the preservation and protection of endangered species.

Region 4 maintains an extensive system of transportation infrastructure, including roads, trails, parking

lots, bridges, culverts, and low-water crossings. The roads, trails, and parking lots are primarily gravel or

native/primitive surfaces, with some additional high-use facilities that have been constructed with either

asphalt or concrete materials.

Approximately 3,500 miles of Service roadways exist within Region 4, of which close to 1,500 miles

are open to the public. The remaining 2,000 miles are for administrative use only by Service staff.

Similarly, of the approximately 1,700 parking lots and 350 miles of trails maintained by Region 4,

about 1,400 parking lots and 220 miles of trails are open to the public. This compares to over 7,000

miles of roadways, 4,500 parking lots, and 1,400 miles of trails in the entire Service’s nationwide

transportation asset inventory. As one of the eight regions, Region 4 comprises a significant amount

of the overall transportation assets of the Service nationally.

This Long Range

Transportation Plan will assist

Region 4 in determining its

many transportation needs,

prioritizing transportation

projects to best utilize the

funds currently available to

the Service, and aid in the

development of partnerships

with outside agencies for

coordinated planning

opportunities.
ES-4 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4

EXISTING CONDITIONS AND FUTURE TRENDS

Transportation assets receive funding based on condition, importance, and need. The intent of any

LRTP is to identify future needs and plan for them proactively. Thus, it is imperative to understand the

current and evolving state of transportation in Region 4 to look forward and plan for the future. The

data provided in the Existing Conditions and Future Trends Report helps to inform the identification of

improvement areas and needs to assist in the process of selecting projects.

GOAL 1 – ACCESS, MOBILITY, AND CONNECTIVITY

Access, mobility, and connectivity collectively ensure that both visitors and refuge staff can have

travel-mode choices to equitably, easily, and conveniently travel to, from, and within Service units.

Access addresses the ability of people of all ages, economic groups, and physical abilities, as well

as underrepresented populations, to visit Service units. Mobility considers the ease and convenience

for visitors to travel to, from, and within Service units using a preferred mode. Finally, connectivity

addresses the potential to link many modes, both inside and outside units, to maximize possibilities

for transportation connections.

The LRTP considered a wide range of spatial metrics for this goal, including access to stations by road,

bicycle and trail, transit, water, and air. Spatial analysis through Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

was used to complete some of this analysis, while qualitative information also was gathered from the

Regional Alternative Transportation Evaluation2 (RATE) survey. Some highlights from the analysis are

included below:

· Approximately 50% of stations are within one-half mile of a navigable waterway with 18 stations

within a half mile of both an inland and marine route.

· According to the RATE survey, almost a third of visitors reach stations using water-based

transportation.

· Scenic Byways traverse 15 Service units and pass within 10 miles of 60% of the units (79

refuges and nine hatcheries).

· Recreational trail information was available for Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, and North Carolina.

Of the 57 refuges and hatcheries within the four states, 20 intersect or are adjacent to facilities

that support walking, biking, or multi-use activities and an additional 22 are located within one

mile of such facilities.

GOAL 2 – ASSET MANAGEMENT

The Service’s transportation system is necessary for refuge and hatchery staff and visitors to safely

and easily access as well as enjoy the national network of conserved and maintained lands and

waters, but it must be maintained sustainably for future generations. The Service at a national level

has implemented an asset management plan that is consistent with the Asset Management Plan

20093 to manage its diverse set of transportation-related assets in order to provide the best level of

service with the available resources.

Assets maintained by the Service are inventoried in both the Service Asset Maintenance

Management System (SAMMS) and the Road Inventory Program (RIP) databases. RIP is collected

on a cyclical basis every five years by the FHWA’s Eastern and Central Federal Lands Highway

Divisions on behalf of the Service. RIP data served as the primary source for the analysis of this goal

2 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Alternative Transportation Evaluation Report – Region 4 (Volpe Center, 2013)

3 Asset Management Plan (Bureau of Land Management, 2009)
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4 ES-5

area. Figure 3 shows the variation of road conditions for each of the five pavement materials for

public use roads in Region 4. Some highlights include:

· According to RIP, Region 4 contains the largest number of inventoried public use roadway

miles, 1,463.9 miles, compared to the next highest inventoried road miles in Regions 6 and 2,

which have approximately 944 miles and 818 public use miles, respectively.

· Of the 1,463.9 total public road miles, 75.5% (1,105.4 miles) are in “good” or “excellent”

condition. Only 5.3% (77.9 miles) are in “poor” or “failed” condition.

· More than 75% of the public use road miles inventoried, or 1,107.4 miles, are gravel roads.

The remaining 25% consist of native and primitive surfaces (245.7 miles or 16.8%); asphalt

(110.8 miles or 7.6%); and concrete (0.06 miles or <0.1%).

· Nearly 88% of the public use trails (199.0 miles) are classified as being in “excellent”

condition. Only 1.3% (2.9 miles) is classified as being in “poor” or “very poor” condition.

· For units that have more than one acre of parking, only 14 have more than 10% of their

parking surfaces rated in “poor” or “failing” condition. An equal number of units have more

than 80% of their parking surfaces rated as being in “good” or “excellent” condition.

Figure 3: Public Cycle 4 RIP Section Conditions by Surface Type

While many of the transportation assets maintained by Region 4 are in “good” or “excellent” condition,

Region 4 is working to reduce their Deferred Maintenance (DM) backlog. Currently, road repairs and

maintenance are estimated the same despite differences in mission support, design, or usage,

resulting in inflated costs for roadway maintenance. The Service has created a new tiering structure

that will complement the existing asset codes and classifications while addressing other critical

aspects of design, usage and maintenance, and how it supports the overall mission and purpose of

the station. In future RIP inventories, administrative roads and low tier roadways may not be

inventoried and included in DM estimations.

GOAL 3 – COORDINATED OPPORTUNITIES

Transportation resources can be used to help support the mission of the Service. As a result,

coordinated opportunities with other entities can go beyond merely leveraging funding and

1107 miles

240

111

6 0.06

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Gravel Native Asphalt Primitive Concrete

Mile

s

Co

n

ditio

n (p

erce

nt)

Failed Poor Fair Good Excellent Total Miles
ES-6 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4

perhaps consider broader maintenance goals that would be mutually beneficial to both the

partner(s) and the Service. Identifying key partners in the region and at the unit level will be a

valuable exercise to consider during future planning and coordination. The Service’s mission to

work with others to conserve, protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the

continuing benefit of the American people is perfectly aligned with considering partnerships and

coordination with other non-Service entities.

GIS was used once again to identify possible partners through analysis of political boundaries

that intersect or are near to Region 4 refuges and hatcheries. Some highlights include the

following:

· Florida and Louisiana host the greatest numbers of refuges in the Southeast, with 30 and

24 refuges and hatcheries within their borders, respectively.

· Seven refuges within Region 4 straddle state lines, including one that intersects the

Commonwealth of Virginia, outside of the northern boundary of Region 4 and extending

into the territory of FWS Region 5 (Northeast).

· Refuges and hatcheries are located within 183 counties, parishes, and municipios (Puerto

Rico) with 58 refuges crossing more than one county boundary and 23 crossing more than

two counties.

· A total of 40 refuges and fish hatcheries intersect the planning boundaries of 30 separate

metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs).

· Only 10 Region 4 refuges and two hatcheries are not located within 5 miles from another

federal land management agency area. Five of those are located on small isolated islands.

GOAL 4 – ENVIRONMENT

The National Wildlife Refuge System provides benefits to human communities as well as wildlife

populations. Protecting natural habitats, wetlands, coastal resources, grasslands, forests, and

wildernesses, refuges maintain and even improve air and water quality. They have the potential to

relieve flooding from the built (manmade) environment, improve soil quality, and help trap

greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. However, while the Refuge System can alleviate

stresses on surrounding areas, it is important to also consider the effects that the surrounding built

environment may have on the System.

For this goal area, analyses were performed to identify the proximity of environmentally sensitive

areas to refuges and hatcheries. Some interesting results are included below:

· One hundred (100) of the 145 Southeast Region Service Units (about 69% of all units) are

home to at least one species listed as endangered or threatened, of which 87 units serve to

protect species that are listed as endangered.

· Over a third of the Service’s Region 4 units (47) intersect areas or waterways identified as

critical habitats for 29 different species.

· In Alabama, Cahaba River NWR supports the largest number of species with designated

critical habitats (eight species).

· Region 4 has 19 refuges with designated wilderness areas located in six states.

· 110 of the Region’s 145 units (about 76%) intersect at least one classified wetland system.

In addition to LRTP efforts across the country, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) worked

closely with both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Park Service on a project known

as “Strategic Research Initiative: Integration of Federal Lands Management Agency Transportation

Data, Planning, and Practices with Climate Change Scenarios to Develop a Transportation

Management Tool (2014).” This project, conducted by ICF International, is a separate yet parallel
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4 ES-7

effort to the LRTP planning process. Two components, Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation

Planning, are being considered as a part of the tool. The Vulnerability Assessment takes into account

a large amount of data to determine which park and refuge transportation assets are the most

vulnerable to climate change.

Photo Credits: Joe Saenz, Black Bayou Lake NWR; Cristina Pastore, J.N. “Ding” Darling NWR

Once identified, the staff from the parks and refuges can work with the FHWA and ICF International

team to determine the best adaptation options for each. Results from the climate change analyses

and research provide an environmental context to the larger transportation assessment and

recommendations.

GOAL 5 – SAFETY

The Service supports reliable and safe access to and from its network of lands and waters.

Roadways, while an essential component of the national transportation system, can be hazardous

due to road pavement conditions, traffic volumes, high speeds, and the potential for both vehiclevehicle and vehicle-wildlife collisions.

Safety is a concern not only for refuge and hatchery staff and visitors but also for wildlife. Roadways

are a major component of the United States transportation system, and FWS areas located near high

speed, high volume roadways pose greater risks for vehicle-wildlife collisions.

An analysis of safety hot-spots was conducted to determine areas requiring additional focus. Four key

criteria were considered, including 1) high volume roadways within a mile of a unit, 2) high vehicle

collision rates or fatalities within one mile of a unit, 3) road conditions considered to be “poor” or “very

poor,” and 4) high Asset Priority Index (API) according to the Service.

· In FWS Region 4, 51 refuges and four fish hatcheries qualified for at least one of the criteria

above. Of those, 35 refuges and three hatcheries each have one criterion that falls within the

95th percentile for that specific criterion.

· Twenty-two total units qualified for at least two criteria, with three, Mississippi Sandhill Crane

NWR, Pinckney Island NWR and Waccamaw NWR, qualifying for three criteria including high

annual average daily traffic volumes (AADTs), high vehicle collision rates, and high API.

· Only one unit qualified for all four categories, and managed to do so in the 95th percentile of

reported data for three of the four (Private John Allen National Fish Hatchery in Tupelo, MS).
ES-8 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4

GOAL 6 – VISITOR EXPERIENCE

Visitation is one way the Service can support its mission to grant current and future generations the

opportunity to interact with wild lands, fish, wildlife, and plant species, where appropriate. People care

about what they can experience, and the knowledge that they gain from the experiences. Thus, in the

end, promoting the relevance of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the lives of Americans is about

access. Wildlife refuges should be accessible to all, regardless of an individual’s location or physical

abilities.4

Information examined in regard to this goal area came from the Refuge Annual Performance Plans

(RAPP), analysis of the US Census, and the RATE survey results. Some interesting highlights from

the analysis include the following:

· According to the RATE report’s findings, 44 percent of the FWS Region 4 stations do not

believe that their refuge or fish hatchery has sufficient signage present on access roads and

trails.5

· For the system of refuges and fish hatcheries that are open to the public, the local population

within a 25-mile radius of the Region 4 system stations increased from 24.3 million people to

26.8 million people (an increase of about 2.5 million persons or about 10.4%) from 2000 to

2010 (excluding residents of the U.S. Virgin Islands).6

· Population is expected to grow between 2010 and 2030 from 26.0 million people (excluding

residents of both Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands7) to 30.5 million people (an increase

of about 4.5 million persons or 17.2%) within the same 25-mile radius of the R-4 stations.

· The percent of the total regional population classified as living in poverty who are estimated to

be residing within a 25-mile radius of all refuges and fish hatcheries in the Southeast Region

is 17.3%,8 which is higher than the overall national poverty rate of 15.9%9.

Photo Credit: Donald McIntosh, J.N. Ding Darling NWR

SUMMARY OF CURRENT STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH

The LRTP has included multiple levels of stakeholder outreach, resulting in valuable insight into the

processes, operations, and transportation considerations of the Southeast Region of the Fish and

4 Conserving the Future: Wildlife Refuges and the Next Generation, USFWS October 2011.

5 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional Alternative Transportation Evaluation Report – Region 4 (Volpe Center, 2013)

6

 Using 2000 and 2010 county-level census data; excluding the U.S. Virgin Islands, where data is only available for 2000.

7

 State Population Predictions by county – various sources

8

 US 2010 Decennial Census and American Community Survey data, excluding U.S. Virgin Islands

9

 US Census 2011: http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/acsbr11-01.pdf
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4 ES-9

Wildlife Service and its individual stations. The following groups of stakeholders have been involved

in the process:

· Project Management Team, PMT (FWS Region 4, FWS Headquarters, and Eastern Federal

Lands Highway Division of the Federal Highway Administration) – This team coordinated on a

regular basis with the Consultant Team to guide the completion of the LRTP document.

· Coordination Team (FWS national, regional, refuge, and hatchery leaders from across the

Southeast Region along with members of the PMT) – This team served as a sounding board

for the PMT, provided feedback on the overall planning process, plan Goals and Objectives,

productive ways to engage the individual stations for data collection and input, and opinions

on final deliverables and their value to the region and stations.

· Regional Leadership (Division Chief of Budget & Facility Management and Branch Chief of

Facility Management, as well as others) – These regional leaders participated in some

Coordination Team meetings and provided input into the process and supplementary tools

along the way.

· Station Leadership (Refuge and Hatchery Management)

o The station leaders participated in Area calls and webinars at three key points in the

process: 1) Kick-off, 2) Draft Existing Conditions and Future Trends Report, and 3) Draft

Recommendations Report. These webinars allowed for both the dissemination of

information to station managers about the planning process and the gathering of

valuable feedback from them on report deliverables.

o Refuge and hatchery leadership also was asked to participate in one substantial data

call consisting of the RATE survey and additional planning-related questions.

FUNDING AND FINANCIAL GAP

A NEW SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BILL

With the October 1, 2012 effective date of the newest federal surface transportation bill, Moving

Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21), the structure of federal funding programs has

changed since its predecessor, SAFETEA-LU. This LRTP includes details on current key funding

sources through MAP-21 as well as other non-traditional funding mechanisms that have previously

awarded funds to the Service, or could be possible future funding sources. Under MAP-21, many

discretionary grant programs that were provided to the FWS have been eliminated or consolidated

into programs with broader applicability. New funding programs focus on performance of the

transportation system, setting key transportation goals, and focusing on high-use and recreational

areas in particular.

While many familiar SAFETEA-LU discretionary grant programs no longer exist in MAP-21, the

magnitude of future funding levels to support the FWS transportation program, and particularly

Region 4 funding levels, are not anticipated to experience significant change from that which has

been observed since 2006 when the initial SAFETEA-LU allocations were set. It is anticipated that

future surface transportation bills beyond MAP-21 will likely continue to provide Region 4 with an

annual amount comparable to the current $5.83 million annual allocation. The LRTP focuses on

current funding allocation, while additional consideration is given to new transportation funding

opportunities that could be explored through partnerships with outside agencies.

KEY FUNDING SOURCES

The LRTP has identified the most relevant existing and new funding programs for the FWS, including

the Federal Lands Transportation Program (FLTP), the Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP), and
ES-10 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4

the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP). Additional sources are detailed in the Funding and

Financial Gap section of this report.

· While Federal Agencies are not eligible to apply for or receive funds directly, FLAP authorizes

improvements on State or Local access facilities that connect to Federal Lands, benefitting the

FLMAs.

· FLTP authorizes funding for improvements on transportation related assets within the Federal

estate that are generally owned and maintained by the respective FLMA.

· TAP combines several previous funding programs, including the Transportation

Enhancements and Recreational Trails Programs which state and local agencies can use to

enhance FLMA transportation facilities and services.

MAP-21 also has set a clear intention for agencies to coordinate projects and funding to mutually

benefit a variety of users and agencies. For example, FLAP funds go directly to non-Federal entities

such as state or local government agencies, but are intended to specifically improve access to

Federal Lands. This makes it important for FLMAs to coordinate and collaborate directly with adjacent

state, county or local government agencies. The Service’s mission to work with others to conserve,

protect, and enhance fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the

American people is perfectly aligned with considering partnerships and coordination with other

non-Service entities. The LRTP already emphasizes this coordination through Goal 3 – Coordinated

Opportunities. Identifying key partners in the region and at the unit level will be a valuable

exercise to consider during future planning and coordination of funding, particularly through MAP21 programs.

OTHER FUNDING SOURCES

While the majority of transportation funds for Region 4 are anticipated to come directly through either

the FLAP or FLTP programs, it is important to consider alternative means to fill funding gaps and

finance transportation projects. Whether through other programs in MAP-21 or from non-Federal

sources at the state or local levels, transportation funding can be leveraged from a variety of

programs throughout the country.

The Emergency Relief for Federal Roads Program (ERFO) and the Emergency Relief Program (ER)

are two programs that have provided relief for repairs and replacement needed due to serious

damage from presidentially declared natural disasters or catastrophic failure from an external cause.

While these programs have obvious limitation to applicability, Region 4 currently has $2.3 million in

active emergency relief projects. Additional funding sources that have not yet been utilized by FWS

Region 4 are described in detail in the Funding and Financial Gap chapter.

REGION 4 ASSET CONDITIONS AND FINANCIAL GAP

FWS Region 4 contains a very large share of both public-use and overall national FWS transportation

infrastructure assets, as inventoried in RIP and SAMMS. In general, the majority of Region 4 public

road and trail miles are in ‘good’ or better condition, while parking surface conditions include nearly

60% of total acreage in ‘good’ or better condition. While these inventories suggest that Region 4 is

managing its transportation assets very well, maintaining funding levels for routine maintenance to

keep these assets rated in ‘good’ or ‘better’ condition is essential to sustain and improve public

transportation facilities for the long haul.

Two plans focusing on transportation assets and funding have recently been completed at the

national level: The Fish and Wildlife Service National Reauthorization 2013 Prioritization Pilot and
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4 ES-11

Work Optimization Analyses Report10 and the PLAN 2035 – the National Long Range Transportation

Plan.

11 The 2013 Prioritization Pilot concluded that $30 million are being spent annually throughout

the entire FWS. In order to complete an enhanced transportation program, approximately $60 million

would be needed, and to complete a fully implemented plan, $95 million would be needed. At the

highest level of implementation, that equates to an annual funding shortfall of approximately $65

million.

The report also determined that Region 4 paved roadway assets make up 24.4% of the national

assets (25% was used to approximate the regional share of other assets such as bridges, trails,

transit assets, etc.). Therefore, in order to implement an enhanced program or fully implemented

program at the regional level, approximately $14.8 million and $23.4 million would be required each

year, respectively. Assuming a 3% annual inflation rate, this equates to a total need of $321.6 million

and $509.4 million, respectively, through FY 2030. Considering the $5.83 million annual funding

allocation that is anticipated to continue for Region 4, there is estimated to be a total of approximately

$99.1 million available through FY 2030,

which results in a cumulative funding gap of

$222.5 million for an enhanced program or

funding gap of $17.6 million at year one,

and a funding gap of $31.7 million at year

16, with a cumulative funding gap of $410.3

million for the fully implemented funding

scenario.

The current level of transportation funding

available to Region 4 limits the Service’s

ability to maintain current assets and to

implement new innovative and meaningful

projects, now and in the future. New

sources of funding should be explored

wherever possible, including opportunities

to partner with neighboring jurisdictions on

mutually beneficial projects.

The Service’s Deferred Maintenance (DM)

backlog has been a high profile topic since

Congressional Hearings in 2011. The

magnitude of funds indicated in the national

backlog at that time were astronomical and

likely lacked informed differentiation

between asset design, use, and maintenance needs, which resulted in a highly inflated bottom line.

In parallel with the FWS Region 4 LRTP development process, the FWS Roads Tiers and Decision

Tree was employed to complement existing asset classifications and address additional critical

aspects of design, usage and maintenance to better inform maintenance and funding needs. These

tools are discussed in the Asset Management chapter of the Existing Conditions and Future Trends

Report and are anticipated to help mitigate some of the estimated funding gap by better interpreting

the usage and maintenance needs of transportation assets.

10 Fish and Wildlife Service National Reauthorization 2013 Prioritization Pilot and Work Optimization Analyses Report

(Stantec, 2013)

11 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service PLAN 2035 the National Long Range Transportation Plan (2014)

Figure 3: Region 4 Transportation Funding Gap

for a Fully Implemented Funding Plan
ES-12 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4

PROJECT SELECTION PROCESS

The culmination of the LRTP effort is the development of an enhanced project selection process. In

light of guidance set forth by MAP-21, performance-based planning will be at the core of all

transportation funding decision-making. It is imperative that the refuges and hatcheries in Region 4

develop creative and impactful transportation projects that can compete not only within the region but

also at the federal level within the FWS, with other FLMAs, and within regions and states across the

country.

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION AND SELECTION

The Southeast Region of the Service annually updates and develops a 5-year project plan for

transportation improvements, which includes both asset management projects and more substantial

capital projects. Of the $5.8 million that the region annually receives through MAP-21, $250,000 is set

aside for regraveling projects and an additional $140,000 is set aside for urgent bridge repairs. The

remaining funding of approximately $5.4 million is used for larger capital projects.

Currently, stations notify the region of various project needs, and the region creates a list of potential

projects. This list is then submitted to area managers for their review and feedback. With the

assistance of area managers, the region creates a 5-year project plan for implementation. Much of

the project identification process will remain the same as it has been, but performance-based

requirements of MAP-21 will necessitate a more quantitative analysis of projects. A Project Evaluation

Tool has been developed as part of the FWS Region 4 LRTP process to assist in project prioritization.

PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA AND TOOL

The Project Evaluation Criteria and Tool provides station, region, and national leadership with a

quantitative process for evaluating transportation projects. The projects that provide higher

transportation value should be funded before those that provide lower value. The National LRTP for

the Fish and Wildlife Service outlines six primary metric categories for the evaluation and selection of

projects. Region 4 has maintained those six categories and has included subcategory metrics using

National Plan guidance, analysis conducted through the regional LRTP process, and RATE survey

responses from station leadership.

The six project evaluation categories are provided below:

1. Improves transportation safety

2. Improves “state of good repair” of transportation assets

3. Enhances transportation choices to, from, and within FWS stations

4. Enhances environmental conditions in the field and/or helps to meet programmatic goals

5. Meets a local priority: (a) documented in a Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP), (b)

other transportation plan; (c) is within a Region’s high-use or urban station; or (d) provides

economic benefit to local partners

6. Supports transportation partnerships and leveraging of transportation funds/programs to

benefit FWS

An illustration of a portion of the project evaluation worksheet associated with the “Improves

Transportation Safety” category is presented below. This tool will be used to assist Regional

leadership with the identification of priority projects across the Region. Technical merit is part of the

prioritization process, as it is in all planning processes, but stakeholder involvement also will play an

important role. Qualitative considerations for project prioritization will include availability of funds,

project development delivery schedules, and time constraints for right-of-way and environmental
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4 ES-13

work. Area, regional, and national leadership will discuss high-scoring projects from a qualitative

perspective to determine which projects should be advanced for implementation.

PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND FUTURE USE

LRTP USE BY THE REGION

The Long Range Transportation Plan is meant primarily to serve as a regional planning document.

The Existing Conditions and Future Trends Report provides a regional snapshot of transportation

assets and needs with additional detail listed by station in the Appendix document. The

Recommendations Report includes policy guidance and evaluation tools that the region can use to

prioritize projects in light of new federal funding guidance and the FWS National LRTP that seeks to

fund projects that will provide a strong return on investment. The Recommendations Report also

includes suggested data collection efforts that the region or individual stations should consider over

the next few years prior to the next update of the LRTP.

Stations for Further Transportation Study – Regional Evaluation Tool

The Project Evaluation Tool is an important resource for prioritizing transportation projects within the

region by determining which projects provide the greatest value. Another tool has been created as

part of the Region 4 LRTP effort that provides value at an earlier stage of the transportation planning

process. The Stations for Further Transportation Study tool is meant to be primarily an evaluation tool

for use by regional staff to determine which refuges and hatcheries may warrant further, more

detailed transportation study.

Project Evaluation Tool - Criteria Excerpt
ES-14 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4

The tool uses only information that has been analyzed or gathered as a part of the Region 4 LRTP or

the voluntary RATE survey responses collected from station management. It scores each refuge on a

scale of 0 to 100 points. Metrics are broken down into the six main goal areas of the LRTP. Each goal

has multiple metrics for which the refuges can score points, and awarded points identify areas where

there is a need or challenge that could be rectified with transportation enhancements that would

require further analysis. Thus, stations with the highest scores can be considered for additional

detailed transportation study.

LRTP USE BY STATIONS

The LRTP document is valuable for regional-level planning; however, it can be challenging for

individual stations to extract relevant local-level information that is useful for their planning efforts.

Recognizing this difficulty, as well as a lack of time and resources to consider the full LRTP process

at the station and regional levels, some additional tools and resources were developed as a part of

the LRTP process to provide greater value at the station level.

Incorporating Transportation into CCPs

The primary resource that the LRTP will provide at the station level is through production of an

amendment to the Comprehensive Conservation Plan process for refuges to incorporate

transportation considerations. Regional funding for CCPs has been discontinued at this time;

however, refuges have the option to update their CCPs on their own. While CCPs may not be done

regularly, the PMT decided to amend the necessary documents to include transportation so that any

refuge deciding to update their plan will have the tools to adequately consider transportation. These

documents include Station Fact Sheets, the User Guide, an updated Work Plan, and an updated

Template. It is important to remember that the LRTP is a long range planning document with a 20-

year planning horizon. Future federal funding levels are not known at this time, and it is practical to

anticipate changes that may occur 5-10 years from now. A similar process can be undertaken to

update Comprehensive Hatchery Management Plans (CHMPs) as well.

STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH AND COMMUNICATION PLAN

Stakeholder input is critical to the success of any planning project, no matter the size. It is important

to recognize that different types of outreach are applicable to different types of planning efforts. The

following guidance is provided to assist the region and its stations with tailoring outreach to the scale

and intensity of the plan.

LRTPs for FLMAs

LRTPs are by nature multi-decade plans that consider large geographic areas. In the case of the

Region 4 FWS LRTP, the plan has developed 20-year capital investment and maintenance needs

estimates and recommendations for stations across ten states, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin

Islands. It is thus prohibitively expensive and time consuming to conduct traditional outreach through

public meetings and open houses in multiple locations. Following the completion of this plan, the

Regional Transportation Program Manager with support from other regional, area, and station staff

should reach out to key state and regional transportation planning agencies and other FLMAs to

advertise the completion of the plan. The plan should be posted on the Region 4 website as well as

the websites of individual refuges and hatcheries where they exist. The notice of availability of the

FWS Region 4 LRTP will also be published in the Federal Register, which will provide an additional

opportunity for broad public access to the plan.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4 ES-15

Transportation step-down plans and other small area studies

Small area plans allow for more localized outreach efforts than the higher-level LRTP due to the

shorter planning horizon and smaller study area. Some of these plans include subregional plans

between a smaller grouping of stations (such as a refuge complex) or in partnership with other

FLMAs as well as transportation step-down plans at individual refuges or hatcheries. In addition to

gathering input within the Service and EFLHD, it also is prudent to engage relevant local, regional,

and state agencies whose boundaries overlap with Service boundaries. Outreach to the general

public as well as to refuge and hatchery visitors and Friends Groups is not only feasible but strongly

encouraged at this scale as well.

Project studies

Project-level studies are the smallest and most focused of all the planning studies and therefore

encourage a more targeted outreach plan than some of the broader studies. In addition to the general

public meetings and surveys, stakeholders directly impacted by the project must also be involved. At

this scale, all projects using federal funding must comply with the NEPA process, which includes

public outreach during project scoping and feasibility, the draft environmental document, and the final

environmental document. In the case of a Categorical Exclusion, less public outreach may be

required.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE PLAN ACTIVITIES

This is the first ever Long Range Transportation Plan for the Southeast Region of the Service, and

many opportunities for additional data collection, process and policy refinement, and outreach and

partnership have been identified for future planning activities. Additionally, transportation conditions

and needs change over time, so aspects that were not considered as a part of this plan may need to

be studied in the future.

One overarching data collection item to which FWS Region 4 should commit will be the continued

search for updates in available geospatial information system (GIS) databases. Cataloging resources

in GIS is an ongoing process throughout the U.S., including updates to keep up with changes in the

landscape of the built environment in proximity to existing and any future Region 4 stations.
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – LRTP Region 4

Region 4 – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Long Range Transportation Plan

Executive Summary

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

1 800/344 WILD

http://www.fws.gov

February 2015