Transportation planning and programming: barriers to wildlife movement.
The bill imposes new duties on regional transportation agencies, requiring them to analyze and document potential barriers to wildlife connectivity during infrastructure projects. Established metrics for the assessment will involve consulting with the Department of Fish and Wildlife and using established conservation practices to address these impacts. This necessitates a more integrated approach to transportation planning that aligns with environmental preservation goals, ultimately contributing to more sustainable development practices and improving habitat restoration efforts.
Assembly Bill 902, introduced by Assembly Member Schultz, aims to enhance the connectivity of wildlife across transportation infrastructure in California. The bill mandates that regional transportation planning agencies must include assessments of wildlife connectivity and permeability in their transportation plans, particularly during the adoption or revision phases of these plans after January 1, 2028. It emphasizes recognizing barriers to wildlife movement caused by development and transportation networks, with an objective to minimize, avoid, or mitigate these impacts effectively.
Overall, the sentiment around AB 902 appears to be supportive among environmental advocates and agencies focused on wildlife conservation. The measure is viewed positively as a step towards sustainable transportation practices and the preservation of California’s biodiversity. However, there may also be contention regarding the implementation and potential costs associated with assessing and remediating barriers to wildlife connectivity, particularly from entities concerned about the added regulatory burden on transportation projects.
Despite its intention to support wildlife connectivity, some stakeholders may argue that the requirements could complicate and delay transportation projects, which are often already subject to rigorous regulatory scrutiny. This tension between environmental protection and infrastructure development may lead to discussions about the balance of these interests, particularly concerning timelines and funding for the necessary assessments and remediation efforts.