The expansion of highways and roads can fragment natural habitats and thus decrease the viability of ungulate subpopulations. It can also increase the number of vehicle collisions with wildlife. Although collisions apparently contribute to only a minor part of the annual mortality for most ungulate populations, they have become a serious road-safety problem in Europe, the United States, and Japan. To better understand this threat to biodiversity and road safety, we reviewed European and, secondarily, North-American and Japanese literature on ungulate traffic collisions. In contrast to the results of some long-term studies, we argue that the relationship suggested between the number of road kills and traffic volume is confounded by population dynamics, changes in traffic volume, and sampling intensity. Although sexes may run distinct seasonal risks of collision, the age and sex composition of road kills reflect population structure in the field. We also argue that observed seasonal and daily patterns in the number of road kills, related to life-history features of the species involved, should form the template for solutions to the problem. We found no strong evidence of the effects of permanent warning signs, 90° light mirrors, scent, or acoustic fencing on the number of kills per crossing. To reduce the risk of ungulate traffic collisions, we recommend a combination of fencing and wildlife passages for roads and railroads that combine high traffic volume with high speed. For secondary roads we recommend seasonal application of intermittently lighted warning signs, triggered if possible by the ungulates. We emphasize the need for educational programs.
[1]
Humphrey,et al.
Use of Highway Underpasses by Florida Panthers and Other Wildlife
,
1995
.
[2]
Claire C. Vos,et al.
Landscape Ecology of a Stressed Environment
,
2012,
Springer Netherlands.
[3]
Laura A. Romin,et al.
Lack of Response by Mule Deer to Wildlife Warning Whistles
,
1992
.
[4]
J. L. Griffis,et al.
White-tailed deer roadside behavior, wildlife warning reflectors, and highway mortality
,
1991
.
[5]
P. H. Pedersen,et al.
Moose-train collisions: The effects of vegetation removal with a cost-benefit analysis
,
1991
.
[6]
G. A. Feldhamer,et al.
Effects of interstate highway fencing on white-tailed deer activity
,
1986
.
[7]
Dale F. Reed,et al.
Effectiveness of Highway Lighting in Reducing Deer-Vehicle Accidents
,
1981
.
[8]
D. F. Reed.
Mule Deer Behavior at a Highway Underpass Exit
,
1981
.
[9]
Lars Åberg.
The human factor in game-vehicle accidents: A study of drivers' information acquisition
,
1981
.
[10]
H B Graves,et al.
Highway Right-of-Way Fences as Deer Deterrents
,
1978
.
[11]
R. Case.
INTERSTATE HIGHWAY ROAD-KILLED ANIMALS: A DATA SOURCE FOR BIOLOGISTS1
,
1978
.
[12]
D. F. Reed,et al.
BEHAVIORAL RESPONSE OF MULE DEER TO A HIGHWAY UNDERPASS
,
1975
.
[13]
Dale F. Reed,et al.
Use of One-Way Gates by Mule Deer
,
1974
.
[14]
Keith R. McCaffery,et al.
Road-Kills Show Trends in Wisconsin Deer Populations
,
1973
.
[15]
J. Tigner,et al.
Evaluation of two mammal repellents applied to browse species in the Black Hills
,
1968
.