Assessment of Deer–Vehicle Crash Mitigation Structures on the US 33 Nelsonville, Ohio, Bypass
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Volume 149, Issue 8
Abstract
The US 33 Nelsonville Bypass project involved construction of a new four-lane divided highway through the Wayne National Forest in southeastern Ohio, an area high in species diversity and home to several threatened and endangered species. The project included three wildlife underpass structures to promote habitat connectivity, 16 jump out structures to allow wildlife to exit the highway right-of-way (ROW), and 2.44-m (8-feet) tall exclusion fencing along the ROW boundary to discourage entry. This paper reports the results of a comprehensive research study undertaken to determine if these features were effective at reducing collisions between vehicles and wildlife (specifically, white-tailed deer). A multi-season camera-based monitoring plan was deployed to track the movement of animals within and around the highway ROW. The results of the analysis showed that the crossing structures were heavily used and that the tall fencing was effective at excluding deer from the highway area. Approximately 43% of deer that approached the jump out structures used them to successfully exit the ROW. Analysis of traffic crash data from six years after the opening of the highway suggests that the prevalence of deer crashes on the highway is lower than other highways in the region, indicating that the mitigation features appear to be successful at reducing such collisions. Considering the additional costs of constructing the mitigation features and the economic benefits of the associated deer crash reductions, the incremental cost-benefit ratio of the complete installation is estimated to be 1.65, indicating a net positive benefit realized by the mitigation plan. The results of this study suggest that wildlife mitigation structures can be effective in supporting highway development in wildlife-sensitive areas, particularly if the placement of the structures relates to existing wildlife patterns and the features are maintained post-construction.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Data Availability Statement
Some or all data, models, or code that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Acknowledgments
The authors acknowledge the Ohio Department of Transportation for supporting the research study from which this paper was drawn. The support of Matt Perlik of the ODOT Office of Environmental Services throughout the study is gratefully acknowledged. The authors also wish to thank Nicole Dake and Jeffery Roush for their assistance with collecting camera trap data and processing photos used in the analysis; Tyler Meeker for updated crash statistics; Matt Trainer for assistance with GIS; and Chloe Musick for assistance with graphics. Finally, the authors wish to thank three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper.
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this paper are solely the opinions of the authors and do not represent the official views of Ohio University or the Ohio Department of Transportation. Any errors, inaccuracies, or omissions are the sole responsibility of the authors.
References
Bellis, M. A. 2008. “Evaluating the effectiveness of wildlife crossing structures in Southern Vermont.” Master’s thesis, Dept. of Natural Resources Conservation, Univ. of Massachusetts-Amherst.
Bissonette, J. A., and P. C. Cramer. 2008. Evaluation of the use and effectiveness of wildlife crossings. Logan, UT: Utah State Univ.
Bissonette, J. A., and M. Hammer. 2000. Effectiveness of earthen return ramps in reducing big game highway mortality in Utah. Logan, UT: USGS Utah Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit.
Bristow, K., and M. Crabb. 2008. Evaluation of distribution and trans-highway movement of desert bighorn sheep: Arizona highway 68. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona DOT.
Clevenger, A. P. 1998. “Permeability of the trans-Canada highway to wildlife in Banff National Park: Importance of crossing structures and factors influencing their effectiveness.” In Proc., ICOWET. Fort Myers, FL: International Conference on Wildlife Ecology and Transportation.
Clevenger, A. P., A. T. Ford, and M. A. Sawaya. 2009. Banff wildlife crossings project: Integrating science and education in restoring population connectivity across transportation corridors. Radium Hot Springs, BC: Parks Canada Agency.
Clevenger, A. P., and M. P. Huijser. 2011. Wildlife crossing structure handbook: Design and evaluation in North America. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, USDOT.
Clevenger, A. P., and N. Waltho. 2000. “Factors influencing the effectiveness of wildlife underpasses in Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada.” Conserv. Biol. 14 (1): 47–56. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.2000.00099-085.x.
Cramer, P. 2012. Determining wildlife use of wildlife crossing structures under different scenarios. Salt Lake City, UT: Utah State Univ. and Utah Transportation Center.
Dodd, N. L., J. W. Gagnon, S. Boe, K. Ogren, and R. E. Schweinsburg. 2012. Wildlife-Vehicle collision mitigation for safer wildlife movement across highways: State route 260. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona DOT.
Donaldson, B. M. 2005. The use of highway underpasses by large mammals in Virginia and factors influencing their effectiveness. Charlottesville, VA: Virginia Transportation Research Council.
Donaldson, B. M., and K. E. M. Elliott. 2020. Enhancing existing isolated underpasses with fencing to decrease wildlife crashes and increase habitat connectivity. Charlottesville, VA: Virginia Transportation Research Council.
Donaldson, B. M., Y.-J. Kewon, and L. N. Lloyd. 2016. “Roadside activity and behavior of white-tailed deer and other wildlife near unfenced underpasses.” Transp. Res. Rec. 2571 (1): 29–38. https://doi.org/10.3141/2571-04.
Forman, R. T. T., et al. 2003. Road ecology: Science and solutions. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Glista, D. J., T. L. DeVault, and A. DeWoody. 2009. “A review of mitigation measures for reducing wildlife mortality on roadways.” Landscape Urban Plann. 91 (1): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.11.001.
Harmon, T., G. Bahar, and F. Gross. 2018. Crash costs for highway safety analysis. Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, Office of Safety.
Hopkins, C. B., et al. 2018. Effectiveness of wildlife mitigation treatments along the Nelsonville Bypass. Athens, OH: Ohio Univ.
Huijser, M. P., J. Fuller, M. E. Wagner, A. Hardy, and A. P. Clevenger. 2007. Animal-vehicle collision data collection: A synthesis of highway practice. Bozeman, MT: National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Western Transportation Institute.
Huijser, M. P., P. McGowen, A. P. Clevenger, and R. Ament. 2008a. Wildlife-vehicle collision reduction study: Best practices manual. Bozeman, MT: Western Transportation Institute.
Huijser, M. P., P. McGowen, J. Fuller, A. Hardy, A. Kociolek, A. P. Clevenger, D. Smith, and R. Ament. 2008b. Wildlife-vehicle collision reduction study: Report to Congress. Bozeman, MT: Western Transportation Institute.
Lehnert, M. E. 1996. “Mule deer highway mortality in Northeastern Utah: An analysis of population-level impacts and a new mitigative system.” Master’s thesis, Dept. of Fisheries and Wildlife, Utah State Univ.
Ludwig, J., and T. Bremicker. 1983. “Evaluation of 2.4-meter fences and one-way gates for reducing deer-vehicle collisions in Minnesota.” Transp. Res. Rec. 913 (Mar): 19–22.
MDT (Montana DOT). 2014. “Proposal for monitoring wildlife crossings on US 93 South.” Accessed November 24, 2021. http://www.mdt.mt.gov/research/projects/env/us93_wildlife.shtml.
ODOT (Ohio DOT). 2005. “Final environmental impact statement, US 33 Nelsonville Bypass, HOC/ATH-33-17.00/0.00, PID 14040, Hocking and Athens Counties, Ohio.” Accessed November 24, 2021. https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5445685.pdf.
ODOT (Ohio DOT). 2019. Official transportation map. Columbus, OH: Office of Technical Services.
ODOT (Ohio DOT). 2022. Safety analysis guidelines. Columbus, OH: Division of Planning, Office of Program Management.
Reed, D. F., T. M. Pojar, and T. N. Woodard. 1974. “Use of one-way gates by mule deer.” J. Wildl. Manage. 38 (1): 9–15. https://doi.org/10.2307/3800194.
Siemers, J. L., K. R. Wilson, and S. Baruch-Mordo. 2013. “Wildlife fencing and escape ramp monitoring: Preliminary results for mule deer in Southwest Colorado.” In Proc., ICOET. Scottsdale, AZ: International Conference on Ecology and Transportation.
Sinha, K. C., and S. Labi. 2007. Transportation decision making: Principles of project evaluation and programming. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Walker, G., and J. W. Baber. 2003. Wildlife use and interactions with structures constructed to minimize vehicle collisions and animal mortality along State Road 46, Lake County, Florida. Apopka, FL: Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Volume 149 • Issue 8 • August 2023
Copyright
© 2023 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Nov 24, 2021
Accepted: Jan 11, 2023
Published online: May 23, 2023
Published in print: Aug 1, 2023
Discussion open until: Oct 23, 2023
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.