C. Avoidance & Compensation Interviews

1. Methodology

Phone interviews were conducted with state DOTs to explore their efforts at avoiding habitat fragmentation during the regional planning process as well as at the project planning level.  The interviews also investigated whether states have methods of compensating for habitat fragmentation and connectivity loss when impacts to habitat were found to be unavoidable, and how those methods work.   The interviews were conducted via telephone and lasted, on average, 60 minutes each.

The states were selected for interview by examining the responses to the online screener survey which was conducted in July-August 2010.  The results of this survey were reported in the October 1, 2010 Task 2 Memorandum.  Selection was based on the number of affirmative responses provided by each state and also whether a state was willing to discuss the topic further, as indicated by their response to that specific survey question. Taking into consideration previous participation in the Minimization interviews as well as geographical distribution, if a state indicated that they were willing to participate in the phone interview, every effort was made to contact that state and set up an interview.  However, some of the states that were originally selected for interview either did not respond or were unavailable to participate and it was necessary to find replacements.  Ultimately, only seven states were available to participate in this round of interviews and they are as follows:

  1. Oregon
  2. Arkansas
  3. Indiana
  4. New York
  5. New Hampshire
  6. Maryland
  7. Texas

Interview questions were developed and reviewed by the NCHRP Panel prior to conducting the phone interviews.  The intent of the questions was to examine the efforts made by states to avoid fragmenting habitat during statewide and regional planning and also at the state DOT project planning level.  The questions also looked at what types of mitigation activities state DOTs are involved in and if the compensation is intended to directly address habitat loss, or whether that is indirectly addressed through the process.  The questions were somewhat structured around the answers provided by the states in their online screener survey responses, and were adjusted accordingly during the phone interview to be specific to each state’s particular strengths or challenges.  A copy of these questions can be found in Appendix C of this memorandum.

Go to 2. Results Summary