# Presentation: 193324

## Wildlife Vehicle Collision Reduction Study

## Why this Study

**Why this Study**

**Notes:**
Safety.   Up to 1 million WVC crashes.  US Congress directed the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a national wildlife vehicle collision (WVC) study
Section 1119 of the Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Action: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU)

## Goals of the Study

- Advance the understanding of the causes and impacts of wildlife vehicle collisions
- Review methods to reduce collisions between motor vehicles and wildlife
- Describe solutions to this growing safety problem

*Sign and flashing lights, part of an animal detection warning system*

## Summary of Findings“By the Numbers”

- An estimated **one to two million** WVCs with large animals occur annually in the US.
- More than **98%** of WVCs are _single vehicle crashes_.
- The vast majority (as high as **90%** in some states) of reported _WVCs involve deer_.

- An estimated _**200 **__people die_ each year from WVCs.
-  **89%** of WVCs occur on _two-lane roads_
- WVCs occur more frequently in the early morning (**5-9 a.m.**) and evening (**4 p.m. – midnight**), when animals are more active.

## Causes and Factors

**Notes:**
Graphically shows challenge for wildlife when crossing roads.

## WVCs are increasing compared to Total Crashes 

- (Data Source: GES)

**Notes:**
The number of all crashes is holding relatively steady at slightly above six million, while the number of AVCs is increasing. Statistically a linear regression line on the total annual AVCs shows an increasing slope of 6,769 AVCs per year (t=7.8, R-squared = 0.81, F=60.6). In addition, the proportion of AVCs to total crashes has a positive slope of 0.11% per year (t=9.4, R-squared = 0.86, F = 89.1).

## Annual WVCs Estimated by Insurance Industry

- (Data Source: State Farm Insurance)

**Annual WVCs Estimated by Insurance Industry**

**Notes:**
State Farm estimate to capture underreporting of WVC.  

## Monthly Distribution of WVCs

- (Data Source: FARS, HSIS, GES)

- 0

- 0.05

- 0.1

- 0.15

- 0.2

- 0.25

- JAN

- FEB

- MAR

- APR

- MAY

- JUN

- JUL

- AUG

- SEP

- OCT

- NOV

- DEC

**Proportion of Collisions**

- FARS

- HSIS

- GES

**Notes:**
For some species, there are clearly certain times of the year when WVCs occur more frequently. For large mammals, numerous studies have shown that WVCs occur more frequently in the fall (e.g., October and November) and in the spring (May-June). The peak in the spring is generally not as high as that in the fall. The fall peak is typically explained due to mating season, migration and hunting season, all of which cause animals to move around more. The spring peak is explained by distribution of young and migration.

## Time-of-Day Distribution

- (Data Source: FARS, GES, HSIS)

- 0

- 0.02

- 0.04

- 0.06

- 0.08

- 0.1

- 0.12

- 0

- 1

- 2

- 3

- 4

- 5

- 6

- 7

- 8

- 9

- 10

- 11

- 12

- 13

- 14

- 15

- 16

- 17

- 18

- 19

- 20

- 21

- 22

- 23

**Hour of Day**

**Proportion of Collisions**

- FARS

- GES

- HSIS

**Notes:**
The three data sources all show the expected peaks at early morning and evening. Wildlife, especially deer, typically move around more at dusk and dawn. 

## WVCs by Number of Lanes

**On Road**

- (Data Source: GES).

- 0%

- 20%

- 40%

- 60%

- 80%

- 100%

- 1

- 2

- 3

- 4

- 5

- 6

- 7

**Number of Lanes**

**Percent of Accidents**

- WVC

- ALL

**Notes:**
For the GES records with number of lanes and facility types, 89.7% of WVCs occurred on two-lane roads. In comparison, 52% of all crashes occur on two-lane roads.  All two roads included.  Largest increases in suburban area not just rural highways. 

## Accident Distribution by Posted Speed Limit

- (Data Source: GES).

- 0

- 0.1

- 0.2

- 0.3

- 0.4

- 0.5

- 0.6

- 5

- 10

- 15

- 20

- 25

- 30

- 35

- 40

- 45

- 50

- 55

- 60

- 65

- 70

- 75

**Speed Limit**

**Proportion of Accidents**

- ALL

- WVC

**Notes:**
WVCs occur less frequently on low speed roadways.  The initial conclusion is, if the posted speed limit is lowered the number of WVCs will reduce. However, the high number of WVCs on 55 mph roadways is more likely a result of higher populations of wildlife on rural two-lane roadways with this design speed. For non-fatal crashes, most also occur on 55 mph roadways 

## Crashes by Average Daily Traffic 

- (Data Source: HSIS)

- 0

- 0.1

- 0.2

- 0.3

- 0.4

- 0.5

- 0.6

- 0.7

- 1 to

- 5000

- 5001-

- 10,000

- 10,001-

- 15,000

- 15,001-

- 20,000

- 20,001-

- 25,000

- 25,001-

- 30,000

- 30,001-

- 35,000

- >35,000

**ADT**

**Proportion of Collisions**

**Notes:**
WVCs are more likely to occur on low volume roads. Almost half of WVCs in the HSIS states occurred on roadways with less than 5,000 average annual daily traffic (AADT). 

## Severity of Injury Distribution for WVCs vs. All Crashes

- (Data Source: GES).

**WVCs Only**

- 1.7%

- 0.5%

- 2.3%

- 95.4%

- 0.04%

- None

- Possible

- Minor

- Severe

- Fatal

**All Collisions**

- 68.3%

- 17.6%

- 9.4%

- 4.3%

- 0.5%

- None

- Possible

- Minor

- Severe

- Fatal

**Notes:**
GES estimates over five years for WVCs compared to all crashes. The datasets show the proportion of crashes involving human injury is much less for WVCs. 

## Age Distribution for All Crashes and WVCs

- (Data Source: HSIS).

- 0

- 0.01

- 0.02

- 0.03

- 0.04

- 0.05

- 1

- 11

- 21

- 31

- 41

- 51

- 61

- 71

- 81

- 91

**Driver Age**

**Proportion of Collisions**

- All

- WVC

**Notes:**
The interesting finding with WVC crashes is that there is not the pronounced spike for young drivers. HSIS data is shown in this figure (the FARS and GES datasets showed the same trend). 

## Up to $8 billion annually.  Injury, property damage, crash scene response and investigation.

**Estimated Costs of WVC **

**Notes:**
Based on a total estimate of one million deer vehicle collisions per year in the United States, the estimate of the total cost associated with wildlife vehicle collisions is calculated to be $8,015,000,000 (per year in the United States). Note that collisions with smaller animal species (smaller than deer) and domesticated species (e.g. livestock) were not included in this calculation   8 billion dollars annually State Farm.

## Slide 16

**Notes:**
Crash severity depends on animal size.  8 billion 

## Animal Species Involved in Collisions

- California

- Maine

- 54.4%

- 14.9%

- 20.4%

- 10.3%

- DEER

- LIVESTOCK

- OTHER ANIMAL

- NON-ANIMAL

- (Data Source: HSIS).

- 81.2%

- 15.1%

- 0.6%

- 3.1%

- DEER

- MOOSE

- BEAR

- OTHER
- SPECIES

**Notes:**
Of all recorded accidents in the United States, the vast majority involves deer (Odocoileus sp.), especially white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus). Different states use different categories for WVCs. 

## ESA Listed Species Impacted 		by WVC’s

**Mammals**
**Bighorn sheep **peninsular California population* *
**Key Deer,*** ***San Joaquin Kit Fox,*** ***Canada Lynx **
**Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit*** *
**Florida Panther,*** ***Red Wolf**
**Birds:**
**Audubon's Crested Caracara**
**Hawaiian Goose**
**Florida Scrub Jay**

**Herptiles**
**California Tiger Salamander*** *
**Flatwoods Salamander*** *
**Houston Toad*** *
**American Crocodile*** *
**Desert Tortoise*** *
**Gopher Tortoise **
**Alabama Red-bellied Turtle*** *
**Bog Turtle***, northern population *
**Copperbelly Water Snake*** *
**Eastern Indigo Snake**

_*Direct road mortality is the major threat or among the major threats to survival probability....*_

## Mitigation Measures Shown to 			be Effective 

**Wildlife fencing**
**Underpasses and overpasses with fencing**

## Wildlife Fencing

*Wildlife fencing along US Hwy. 93 on Flathead Indian Reservation, MT*

- Reported reductions in WVCs:   80-99%
- Several types of material are used, page-wire or cyclone fence material most common
- Electric fencing also possible
- Maintenance is a major concern

## Wildlife Crossing with Fencing

**87%** average
-    reduction in WVCs
- Used extensively by a wide array of species
- Associated fencing
- Keeps animals off the road
- Funnels animals towards the crossing

*New highway underpass with fencing*

## Promising Mitigation Measures     to be Further Investigated

**Animal detection systems**
**Reduce speed by traffic calming or reducing the design speed **
- Seasonal wildlife warning signs
- Reduce speed by reducing the posted speed limit
- Wildlife crossing guards
- Large, non-standard wildlife warning signs
- Reduce traffic volume on road networks
- In-vehicle warnings: roadside animal detection system communicating with on-board computers
- In-vehicle warnings: on-board animal detectors
- Roadway lighting to increase visibility

## Promising Mitigation Measures,     to be Further Investigated

- Increasing visibility through vegetation removal
- Stop the use of road salt or consider alternate deicers
- Influence plant species in the roadside to limit forage values
- Reduce population size through wildlife culling
- Reduce population size through habitat alteration
- Boulder barriers
- Wider more reflective striping along white line
- Expanded medians

## Animal Detection Systems

- Systems use sensors to detect large animals that approach the road
- Warning signals are activated to inform drivers a large animal may be on/near the road
- Warning signals are extremely time specific – short duration
- Two major types: area-cover and break-the-beam systems
- 82% reduction in WVCs reported in Switzerland

*Experimental animal detection*
*system in Yellowstone NP*

## Long Tunnels and Long Bridges

- ~ **100% effective** in WVC reductions, but very expensive
- At least 200-300 hundred feet long, sometimes longer
- Allow unhindered animal movements at major connectivity points

*Long bridge on Arizona SR260*

## Reduce Speed by Traffic Calming, Reducing Design Speed

*Speed Bumps Used to Reduce WVCs in Australia*

- Roadkill by Posted Speed Limit in Yellowstone National Park

- 0

- 5

- 10

- 15

- 20

- 15

- 25

- 35

- 40

- 45

- 55

**Posted Speed**

**Roadkill per Mile**

- (Data Source: Gunther et al. 1998).

**Notes:**
Note: the upper sign has been vandalized to look like a dead cassowary.  If the goal is reduced vehicle speeds, reducing the design speed may be more effective than reducing the posted speed limit. However, the cost may be much more expensive. In his study in Yellowstone, Gunther was making the case for not upgrading the design speed of the roadways during planned reconstruction, which would actually save money. A lower design speed typically relates to sharper horizontal and vertical curves, smaller lane widths, narrow or no shoulders, and smaller clear zones (i.e., obstructions such as trees closer to the roadway). In addition to the basic highway geometrics, there are numerous traffic calming methods used to slow vehicles down. These are typically used in neighborhoods or on a highway approaching a town. However, they are not typically used on major highways where most WVCs occur. Traffic calming treatments could include speed bumps/humps, traffic circles, curb extensions, sidewalk extensions, raised medians and rumble strips.

## Slide 27

| Mitigation measure  | Cost ($ /km /yr))  | % DVC Reduction  | Benefit ($ /km /yr))  | Balance ($ /km /yr))  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Standard warning signs  | $18  | 0%  | $0  | -$18  |
| Anti-fertility treatment  | $61,702  | 50%  | $20,970  | -$40,732  |
| Long bridges  | $781,250  | 100%  | $41,940  | -$739,310  |
| Long tunnels or long bridges  | $1,500,000  | 100%  | $41,940  | -$1,458,060  |
| Animal detection systems (ADS)  | $31,300  | 82%  | $34,391  | $3,091  |
| Population culling  | $2,508  | 50%  | $20,970  | $18,462  |
| Relocation  | $10,260  | 50%  | $20,970  | $10,710  |
| Fence (incl. dig barrier)  | $3,760  | 87%  | $36,488  | $32,728  |
| Fence with gap and crosswalk  | $5,585  | 40%  | $16,776  | $11,191  |
| Fence with gap and ADS  | $9,930  | 82%  | $34,391  | $24,461  |
| Fence with underpasses  | $5,860  | 87%  | $36,488  | $30,628  |
| Fence with overpasses  | $26,485  | 87%  | $36,488  | $10,003  |
| Fence with under- and overpasses  | $7,510  | 87%  | $36,488  | $28,978  |

## Ineffective or Questionable  Measures to reduce WVC’s

- Standard wildlife warning signs
- Deer reflectors and mirrors
- Audio signals in the right-of-way or deer whistles on vehicles
- Olfactory repellants
- Deer flagging models
- Hazing
- Intercept feeding
- Wildlife relocation in order to reduce population size
- Anti-fertility treatment in order to reduce population size
- Seasonal road closures
- Reflective collars placed on wildlife

**Notes:**
Based on expert opinions of Technical Working Group.  Again note the rankings were based on deer vehicle collisions.  Seasonal road closures are used successfully for reducing collisions with amphibians.  

## Next steps

**WVC training manual**
**WVC training course**