Wildlife-Vehicle Collisions in Vancouver

How to make our roads bio-inclusive with eco-friendly smart lights?

There are always animals that want to cross the streets and they cannot distinguish the line between their territory from the roads. Roads and traffic have very many negative ecological and environmental effects on wildlife. Animals involved in 11,000 vehicle collisions annually across BC (Jim E. 2019). Although there are some signs and fences installed by the roads where there is more danger of animal crossing, the data for roadkill is still significant. The data leads us to think whether those signs are enough or not. Even if we drive safely, some of the accidents are unavoidable. For instance, when a deer is suddenly running in the middle of a road, how would a driver react instantly? Especially, if the vision is limited because of the bad weather or darkness. The first thing we should notice is that we, humans, made these roads in the ecosystem; so, we are responsible for the consequences on the roads as well as accidents happening with animals. As an interaction designer, I am introducing the problems and performing research on this important issue in the world. In particular, Vancouver has a wider bio-diversity compared to other big cities, therefore, in designing roads, we should be more considering. Due to the concerns around this issue, I discuss the problems and try to figure out a way to make the roads more bio inclusive. In other words, I aim to design roads that facilitate the co-occurrence of humans and wildlife to minimize injuries of both.

The wildlife-vehicle collision (WVC) is dangerous for both motorists and wildlife. The collisions can cause vehicle damage, as well as human and animal injuries. There are prevention programs that have been running that try to increase the public awareness of this global issue. There are some ads that have been tailored to provide species-specific behavioral information for moose, deer and bighorn sheep in high crash areas and also during fall and winter conditions (Jim E. 2019). But in BC, it is not just big animals that are sacrificed in the crashes; small animals like squirrels or skunks are also in serious danger as they are local residents in Vancouver. Some of the provided information is to drive safer and slowly in the early morning or late nights when animals are most likely to cross the roads.

In the article named “Wildlife warning signs” writers, Amy Bond and Darryl Jones, are finding out the effective power of the current warning signs and ways to improve the design of those signs to optimize the driver’s response. They explain, “wildlife warning signs are aimed to reduce Wildlife-vehicle collisions but there is little evidence that they are effective” (Amy B. et al., 2013, pg. 1142). Based on their findings, we have yet to perfectly design our warning signs on the roads to fit our needs. They also mention that wildlife-vehicle accidents usually occur in urban areas; especially, where habitat remnants are still present in the landscape or the road is expanding into the natural territories (Amy B. et al., 2013, pg. 1143). In Vancouver, the same pattern of crossing natural boundaries is evident. As we are benefiting from the beauties of nature in Vancouver, the least we can do is to prevent hurting wildlife. So far, our efforts were not sufficient enough to avoid damaging the ecosystem around us.

In addition to the warning signs, another existing solution is abounding fences by the roads. According to the article “monitoring Wildlife-vehicle collision in the information age”, exclusionary fences which are for preventing wildlife from accessing road right-of-ways, are only constructed on the road section with the high traffic volumes and high number of WVCs (Daniel D. et al., 2014, pg. 1). According to this quote not all the streets within nature are facilitated with protective fences but only the streets with high traffic are equipped. Lack of exclusionary fences on smaller streets accounts for 11,000 WVC annually in BC. Another problem they addressed in this article is about the importance of collecting WVC’s data to find out where most animal carcasses occur and where they need the most prevention method. Ecologists have been collecting these data with paper and pen since 1920 and this is how the method they are still using (Daniel D. et al., 2014, pg. 2). Unfortunately, taking data by hand is decreasing the accuracy of the reports. In this modern age, instead, we can use our modern technologies to create more eco-friendly roads and collect and report data with higher precision.

To increase the accuracy of collecting and reporting data, Daniel D. et al. propose using smartphone apps and online databases. According to the article, “monitoring Wildlife-vehicle collision in the information age”, using WVC reporter system, data are collecting the field using smartphones or mobile web; then collected data is transferred by mobile broadband internet to a centralized database that is linked to a desktop web where all the locations and crashes can be viewed (Daniel D. et al, 2014, pg. 4). As a result, we can make the data online for everyone to see and be more aware of the areas with more accidents. In my opinion, to make this smart data collector system more bio inclusive, we can also mention the kind of habitat, the local species online on a desktop map or an application. Informing people about habitat types can involve them emotionally and reduce WVC.

Furthermore, other problems include human activity damaging the eco-system. As I was doing more research around the effects of roads and vehicles on the natural habitats, I came across an interesting Turkish journal by Ali Ugar Ozkan and Nuri Kaan Ozkazang. This journal illustrates that not only vehicle collisions affect surrounding wildlife, but also, traffic noises, night lights, pollution, artificial sets coming from the roads have had a great negative effect on the quality of wildlife habitats so far (Ali U. et al., 2017, pg. 722). It is also reported that some species are experiencing a population decrease due to road accidents. These are some of the reports in this journal: “over 40% of the mortality rate of Britain’s adult European badger population is a direct result of traffic accidents (Harris and Scheck, 1991; Clarke et al., 1998). In Portugal, estimates show that 10% of the Iberian wolf (Canis lupus) population, an endangered species, is hit annually by vehicles south of the Douro River (Grilo et al., 2009), and so many other reports. (Ali U. et al., 2017, pg. 722). Accordingly, our activities are increasing the chances of extinction.

Moreover, another problem is that we underestimate the danger in the low traffic areas. Several studies show that WVCs are not taking place randomly and there are some factors that explain the reasons for the aggression of the roadkill. We can use hotspots of WVCs to more effectively collect information in the areas of higher human activities (Ali U. et al., 2017). Considering the fact that most WVCs are clustered in crowded areas, we usually use hotspot data to protect sites that are more prone to damage. Despite the usefulness of finding the hotspot areas, they can be misleading in taking our attention away from the sites with low accident rates. Respectively, our current technology is not completely decreasing WVCs.

To summarize the problems, warning signs and fences are the only tools that currently exist to alarm the drivers. However, those signs are not always being effective on drivers’ behaviors. Sometimes the signs are more distracting than being helpful; they also can be disregarded since drivers encounter the signs every day and they become a part of everyday norms; which does not require much attention. In addition to the insufficiency of signs, although collecting data and publishing that on the online website using hotspot places data and is very helpful, it is still not a strong effective way to protect the whole wildlife from vehicle collisions. Besides, those collected data are not able to prevent accidents at the moment of danger.

To account for the mentioned problems, in my perspective, we need to design roads to have smart eco-friendly lights. The material used to build the streets should contain temperature sensors that can detect if any alive being from humans to animals is on the street or not. If they are on the street, the sensors will detect the warmness of their body and make the light next to the street lines red. If they are not on the street the light is green so the drivers can pass the road. These lights should be programmed to turn red prior to the time that the organism is passing by so the driver will have time to take action and stop. Having smart lights is beneficial even in the dark time of the days. Another important aspect is the energy source used for the lights. The most eco-friendly and effective resource we have is the solar power to provide energy for our smart lights on the road. Therefore, an eco-friendly smart light equipped with temperature sensors can decrease WVCs.

In conclusion, Wildlife-vehicle collision is one of the most important issues that Vancouver especially the north shore is facing. Roads are one of the thousand human achievements and improvements which benefit humans for easier transportation. But they have several negative effects on the ecosystem and wildlife habitat like decreasing the wildlife population by the accidents happening on the roads. Since we are living in a time that we can easily access smart technologies, why not use our knowledge and science to improve the design of roads and have a more bio inclusive design rather than a human-centered design. By using temperature-sensitive eco-friendly smart lights, although we are still having a negative impact on the ecosystem by pollutions and noises coming from our cars, we would better be able to conserve the wildlife around us by decreasing the collisions. In this way, drivers will drive safer, wildlife will be in less danger of accidents and population loss.

Sketches of the issue and the new design (ecofriendly smart lights) for solving the problem:

Sketches of the materials and sources suggested in the new design:

Bibliography

Bond, A., & Jones, D. (2013). Wildlife Warning Signs: Public Assessment of Components,

Placement and Designs to Optimise Driver Response. Animals.

Olson, D. D., Bissonette, J. A., Cramer, P. C., Green, A. D., Davis, S. T., Jackson, P. J., &

Coster, D. C. (2014). Monitoring Wildlife-Vehicle Collisions in the Information Age: How Smartphones Can Improve Data Collection.

Ozcan, A. U., & Ozkazanç, N. K. (2017). Identifying the hotspots of wildlife-vehicle

collision on the Çankırı–Kırıkkale highway during summer. Turkish Journal of Zoology.

Ford, A. T., Clevenger, A. P., Huijser, M. P., & Dibb, A. (2011). Planning and prioritization

strategies for phased highway mitigation using wildlife-vehicle collision data. Wildlife Biology.

Pagany, R., & Dorner, W. (2019). Do Crash Barriers and Fences Have an Impact on Wildlife

Vehicle Collisions?An Artificial Intelligence and GIS-Based Analysis. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information.

Elliot, J. (2019). Animals involved in 11,000 vehicle collisions annually across B.C.

Retrieved from https://www.vancouverislandfreedaily.com/news/animals-involved-in-11000-vehicle-collisions-annually-across-b-c/.