Summary of ElectroBraid Systems for Wildlife Exclusion and Crossings

This summary focuses on the information gathered regarding ElectroBraid systems for wildlife exclusion and crossings. Information from the ElectroBraid provider can be found at:

State Surveys

A surveyrequesting information on states’ use of the ElectroBraid system was sent and seventeen states responded. The following states indicating they use or plan to use the ElectroBraid system: Alaska, Arizona, Nebraska, Oregon, and Utah.

Wyomingresponded that they are not using the ElectroBraid system but they are researching the use of High Tensile Electric Fence (HTEF). More information on Wyoming’s investigations can be found at:

High Tensile Electric Fence Phase II - Liability Issues, Maintenance Costs and Containment of Bison: FHWA-WY-05/01F

The attached spreadsheet consists of a summary of the survey responses. However, some states provided additional information.

Alaska- the Alaska DOT is in the process of an experimental installation. A summary of this project is available in the Research, Development, and Technology Transfer Tri-Annual Report 2008-2010,pp. 72.

Arizona-we have one (ElectroMat) inon AZ SR 260 on a side access road to keep elk and deer out of the right-of-way since 2007, in this area we originally had 12 accidents per year (2000-2006), since that time we have only had one accident in 3 years so it is definitely not allowing access,

I believe a many of these projects are funded through Transportation Enhancement funds, I know the t ones in AZ are … not 100% sure about the other states. Depending on the situation, safety or hazard elimination funds may help here.

Funding for their evaluation is tricky; we are currently using our own funds (AZ Game & Fish Dept.) to evaluate this ElectroMat but could potentially get funds through our ADOT Transportation Research program. I am not 100% sure but I believe you can roll some monitoring into the Transportation Enhancement projects as well. Depending on the situation, you may get some financial support from your local sportsmen’s group for installation and/or monitoring.

Nebraska- NDOR has plans to construct an 8’ high ElectroBraid Wildlife fence as shown in the attached fence.pdf. The wildlife fence is specifically tailored for white-tailed deer with braided electric rope at 16” and 28” from the ground and three lines at the top as the psychological barrier. A 5’ high physical barrier consisting of 2”x4” vinyl coated mesh is placed less than 3” off the ground. The project length is 3 miles long through cropland and forested land with no public access, and only one house is alongthe fence but on the other side of a county road. Exit ramps will also be used with ½ mile spacing to allow deer, which access the roadway a way off the ROW.

(NDOR) did have a public meeting to present the electric fence project. Most responses were positive while some people not happy with the amount of money being spent on a deer fence when an extended hunting season could fix the deer problem.

Pros:

  1. Provides physical and psychological barrier which will hopefully reduce long-term maintenance.
  2. Double-heliacally braided copper rope will reduce contact area with weeds, as opposed to a solid electric wire.
  3. Line limitors can shut down specific lines covered with water and turn back on when water recedes.
  4. Auto dialer contacts local maintenance when a line is down due to trapped deer or tree falling on line.
  5. Ditch dip poles can effectively prevent deer from accessing roadway through ditch while also not trapping debris and clogging ditch.
  6. The fence will be black or forest green to limit the deer’s ability to spatially determine the exact location of the fence for jumping.Will also avoid the appearance of a steel prison fence along the roadway for miles and miles.
  7. Can be powered by either solar or local contact.
  8. Reduced exertion expected by deer allows the post spacing to increase from the 12’ typical woven wire fence to 16’
  9. Expect low electric costs due to the fence only being on 9/100th of a second and off the remaining 91/100th.

Cons:

  1. May require some placement of weed killer along fence to reduce possibility of weed contact if weeds get too thick.
  2. Local people or farmers will have to be aware of the fence, even though there will be signs placed to warn of fence location.

Oregon-we are putting the mats and a small amount of fencing on the US97 Lava Butte project. They are not operational yet.3 of 6 mats installed to date. They extend 6 feet beyond edge of pavement on the shoulder. We had plow damage to one mat within 2 weeks. Solution is to pave shoulder. We already had battery stolen out of a solar power unit for the crossing. Solution is to make sure power unit is well secured / locked. We tested with deicing agents for durability and appeared to perform well (report available). One challenge will be providing adequate clear zone at mat crossings in relation to wildlife fence. We are basing reliability offElectroBraid’s other installed projects in Arizona and Canada.

Decision to use ElectroMat was because of effectiveness and strong desire by ODOTto not have a metal grating system on roadway ramps.

Expensive system- $1500 per foot in roadway (concreted), $1000 per foot in shoulder. Installation was very quick.

Utah- the mats are very snowplow friendly, in fact, that is the main reason we opted to install them. After a season of plowing, we have seen minimal damage from the plows, with only one of the brass rods getting a small tweak in it. We initially told our plow drivers to lift their plows when crossing the mats (just as they would at a regular cattle guard), but have since found they can plow as normal.

We set the sites up with a pedestrian walk gate, so someone without shoes or someone with a pet has a way to go around the mat. Drivers seem to slow down a bit when they approachthe mat,mainly due to the yellow/black color, but the only way you know you have driven over it, is to hear a slight rattle from the mat. The ElectroBraid folks tell me they are going to try a suggestion I made, and place a 1/4" thick pad between the concrete and the composite planks, to absorb the traffic load and hopefully eliminate the noise. It is a very minor issue.

We have not incurred any costs, as they (ElectroBraid) are required to monitor and keep the units running for a 5-year period. I will note that if there is a problem, Richard and or his staff is here within a few days to resolve the issue. I also have a wildlife camera installed on one of the mats, and have pictures of deer turning away once they approached the mat. I am also installing a camera on a UDOT standard double cattle guard in the same area, to compare which system works better. We also have built a "cage" with fencing to help prevent theft of the solar panels, controller, and 12-volt battery.

In closing, we should all assume that no system is 100% effective, but comparing the ElectroMat to a double cattle guard, it is more cost effective, maintenance and snowplowfriendly, and environmentallyacceptable.

Published Reports

The Nation's Most Advanced Game Crossing System
This article describes a new type of game crossing traffic safety system that was activated near Payson, Arizona, in December 2006. Designed to minimize collisions between motorists and elk along State Route 260, the system uses thermal imaging for detection, electric fencing for channeling of game, radio networking, and solar-powered controls. The article first describes the issues behind the need for such a traffic safety system, relating that traffic surveys have indicated high travel speeds in an area where there is a large elk population. Wildlife underpasses were first installed to provide safe passage for the elk. The article details the 8-foot high electrobraid fencing system that was installed to channel large game animals to the highway crossing. It describes the traffic control equipment consisting of video processors, thermal imaging detectors, solar-powered flasher assemblies, and variable message sign units. Traffic speed data, in addition to wildlife-motorist collision monitoring and elk Global Positioning System (GPS) telemetry, will all be used in evaluating the effectiveness of the game crossing system.
Authors: Norris Dodd and Joe Wise, IMSA Journal, Volume 45, Issue 2
ElectroBraid Fencing for Use as a Deer Barrier
The white-tailed deer (Odocoileusvirginianus) population in the USA has increased from about 350,000 in 1900 to over 25 million in 2002, and this has created many conflicts with public safety and agriculture. Exclusion of deer from impacted areas using 10-foot-high chain-link fencing is a possibility as the long-term solution; but the high cost of this fencing makes this option impractical. Electric fences have the potential to offer a less expensive alternative as a deer-exclusion barrier. The paper tested an electric fence design that is marketed under the name ElectroBraid (ElectroBraid Fence Ltd., Dartmouth, Nova Scotia). This fence comprises a 0.6-cm polyester rope with copper wire woven into it and is carried on frangible, fiberglass posts set at 15m intervals. From January to March 2002 we conducted both 1- and 2-choice tests on free ranging deer at the 2,200ha NASA Plum Brook Station in northern Ohio. Ten stations, each ? 1km apart were set in areas of deer activity. At each station we erected 5x 5m sites of ElectroBraid that enclosed a feed trough in which whole kernel corn was kept. A trail monitoring device was placed within each site to count deer activity. The paper recorded deer intrusions and corn consumption at sites both with and without electricity. Mean deer intrusions at treated sites in both 1- and 2-choice tests were < 1/day while control site intrusions were 84 - 86/day. Mean corn consumption by all wildlife (e.g., deer, raccoons [Procyonlotor], fox squirrels [Sciurusniger]) differed between treated (< 2 kg/day) and control sites (15 kg/day). Based upon the results of this test and the cost of ElectroBraid we conclude that this fence, under the conditions of this five-week test, was an effective and economical deer barrier. The ElectroBraid fence test was part of a research project, the objective of which was to evaluate the efficacy of ElectroBraid brand electric fencing at reducing deer visitation to a feeding site. The Federal Aviation Administration funded the project as part of a line item within an overall budget examining scare devices for use at airports.
The complete proceedings are available at:
Authors: T WSeamans, Z J Patton, and K C VerCauteren

1