TY - JOUR T1 - The diversity of erosion control products and implications for wildlife entanglement JF - Journal of Soil and Water Conservation SP - 82A LP - 87A DO - 10.2489/jswc.2020.1118A VL - 75 IS - 4 AU - Krista J. Ward AU - Kasey L. Jobe AU - Nicholas C. Schiwitz AU - Daniel Saenz AU - Christopher M. Schalk Y1 - 2020/07/01 UR - http://www.jswconline.org/content/75/4/82A.abstract N2 - In the United States, roads are prominent across the landscape, negatively impacting wildlife and ecological processes via road mortality (Brady and Richardson 2017). The extensive roadway system in the United States requires consistent maintenance that results in soil erosion potential. For example, as of August of 2019 in Texas, there were 6,739 active roadway projects, with another 6,448 projects listed to begin within the next four years (Texas Department of Transportation 2019). Despite regulatory and mitigation efforts, soil erosion and stream sedimentation are known to occur at construction sites due to exposure of the soil to environmental factors that influence erosion rates (Kaufman 2000; Benik et al. 2003). At the conclusion of construction projects, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) mandates that erosion control products (ECPs) are deployed on unpacked soil to prevent soil erosion potential and to promote plant growth (Babcock and McLaughlin 2013; Texas Department of Transportation 2018a).The TxDOT maintains an approved product list (APL) of all ECPs (ranging from mesh blankets to sprays and mulches) that can be used by contractors at the conclusion of a roadway construction project. To be placed on the APL, products must pass two performance standards: (1) protect the seedbed of an embankment or drainage channel from the loss of sediment during simulated rainfall or channel flow events, and (2) promote the establishment of warm-season, perennial vegetation … ER -