winter months the cleared track can also act as a migration corridor. On sunny days,
it can serve as a resting place for animals (Seiler 2005).
Kušta et al. (2014b) found a connection between the number of accidents and the
frequency of passing trains, a pattern also reported in other studies (Danks and
Porter 2010; Hussain et al. 2007; Seiler 2004). On the other hand, there was no
correlation between accidents and the abundance of wildlife around the monitored
tracks. The study also found that there were more accidents on tracks with more
meadows and fields around them than on tracks with prevailing forest. However,
significant differences in accidents in different types of habitats (meadows, forests
and scrubland) were not statistically confirmed. According to the information from
employees of Czech Railways, the most frequent collisions with animals occur in
open flat sections of the track, especially at dawn, dusk or at night. This is probably
caused by grazing ungulates in these locations and their greater physical activity at
dusk and dawn (Kušta et al. 2017), which can correlate with temporal patterns of
wildlife-vehicle collision (WVC) on roads (Kušta et al. 2017).
Good Practice and Recommendation for Future Action
Decision Making Process
For individual investment plans, the permissible level of environmental impact is
already pre-defined within a strategic level by SEA procedure (Strategic
Environmental Assessment) and at a project level by EIA procedure
(Environmental Impact Assessment). In the future, the results of the evaluation need
to be considered, especially through the implementation of EIA Follow-up
(Environmental Impact Assessment post-project analysis). To ensure more accurate
predictions and more effective mitigation measures, the existing railways need to
compare the predicted impacts with the ones that occurred in reality and define
recommendations for future authorization procedures based on these comparisons.
Technical Measures
Technical measures against accidents with animals on railway tracks are not very
frequent. For example, measures for reducing drive-through speed of trains or
warning devices are placed (Becker and Grauvogel 1991; Muzzi and Bisset 1990),
noise warning devices are installed (Boscagli 1985; Child 1983), the ground speed
of trains is reduced (Becker and Grauvogel 1991; Child 1983), snow along the
railway is cleaned up, enabling animals to escape from the corridor when snow is
deep (Child 1983; Child et al. 1991), carcasses are removed from around the tracks
(Gibeau and Heuer 1996), spilled cereal grains and other food sources are cleaned
254
Z. Keken and T. Kušta
it can serve as a resting place for animals (Seiler 2005).
Kušta et al. (2014b) found a connection between the number of accidents and the
frequency of passing trains, a pattern also reported in other studies (Danks and
Porter 2010; Hussain et al. 2007; Seiler 2004). On the other hand, there was no
correlation between accidents and the abundance of wildlife around the monitored
tracks. The study also found that there were more accidents on tracks with more
meadows and fields around them than on tracks with prevailing forest. However,
significant differences in accidents in different types of habitats (meadows, forests
and scrubland) were not statistically confirmed. According to the information from
employees of Czech Railways, the most frequent collisions with animals occur in
open flat sections of the track, especially at dawn, dusk or at night. This is probably
caused by grazing ungulates in these locations and their greater physical activity at
dusk and dawn (Kušta et al. 2017), which can correlate with temporal patterns of
wildlife-vehicle collision (WVC) on roads (Kušta et al. 2017).
Good Practice and Recommendation for Future Action
Decision Making Process
For individual investment plans, the permissible level of environmental impact is
already pre-defined within a strategic level by SEA procedure (Strategic
Environmental Assessment) and at a project level by EIA procedure
(Environmental Impact Assessment). In the future, the results of the evaluation need
to be considered, especially through the implementation of EIA Follow-up
(Environmental Impact Assessment post-project analysis). To ensure more accurate
predictions and more effective mitigation measures, the existing railways need to
compare the predicted impacts with the ones that occurred in reality and define
recommendations for future authorization procedures based on these comparisons.
Technical Measures
Technical measures against accidents with animals on railway tracks are not very
frequent. For example, measures for reducing drive-through speed of trains or
warning devices are placed (Becker and Grauvogel 1991; Muzzi and Bisset 1990),
noise warning devices are installed (Boscagli 1985; Child 1983), the ground speed
of trains is reduced (Becker and Grauvogel 1991; Child 1983), snow along the
railway is cleaned up, enabling animals to escape from the corridor when snow is
deep (Child 1983; Child et al. 1991), carcasses are removed from around the tracks
(Gibeau and Heuer 1996), spilled cereal grains and other food sources are cleaned
254
Z. Keken and T. Kušta