Wildlife detection system

Crashes involving wildlife and vehicles are a safety concern. Whether attracted by roadside vegetation or the desire to cross roads, wild animals, and in particular larger animals like deer, were involved in more than 30,000 reportable collisions in Canada in 2000. While the vast majority of these crashes involved only property damage, 6.2% of these occurrences resulted in the death or injury of the motorists involved (Tardif, 2003). The Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) reported that animal strikes on Ontario roads increased by 42% between 1999 and 2008. (Workplace Safety North, 2013).

The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) (2012) carried out a pilot project that was designed to detect deer along a stretch of road where deer regularly crossed the highway. A deer crossing sign would light up when wildlife was detected near the road, to inform motorists that wildlife was near the road. The stretch of highway where the technology was installed experienced a 57% reduction in deer-vehicle collisions in 2007 and a 33% decrease of these crashes in 2008. In 2011, MNDOT began testing an area sensor that detects motion near a section of road with frequent wildlife traffic. The system is calibrated to detect wildlife that is more than two feet high. Study results are not yet available.

In 2009, the MTO began installing wildlife sensor and alert systems along a 1.5 kilometre stretch of one of its highways in Northern Ontario where numerous wildlife-vehicle crashes occur, crashes which mainly involved deer and moose. The system uses infrared beams powered by solar panels and back-up batteries to automatically monitor the highway right of way. The system requires the animal to "break" two beams mounted at different heights, thereby reducing false activations by small animals. When the unit’s sensors are activated by a large animal, a flashing beacon subsequently warns drivers to reduce speed and to be extra vigilant for the presence of wildlife (Ontario Ministry of Transportation, 2010). In the five years prior to the system’s installation, 11 wildlife-vehicle collisions were recorded along the treated stretch of highway. In the four years following the system’s installation, only one wildlife-vehicle collision was reported. (Wood, 2013).

In 2012 and 2013, the MTO installed a Large Animal Warning and Detection System (LAWDS) that uses radar on sections of two of its highways. The system provides operators with a map of the road, indicating where the animal was detected. The map is updated every second and provides operators with information about traffic volume and speed. Initial results from the radar system show that traffic speed is reduced by 15% when the system is active (Wood, 2013).

Huijser et al. (2008) cited the findings of a before-and-after study carried out in Switzerland by Kistler (1998) that tracked vehicle collisions with large animals before and after seven infrared area-cover detection systems were installed. These systems reduced the number of animal-vehicle collisions by an average of 82%. All seven sites experienced a reduction in collisions following the installation of the animal detection system, and three of the seven sites had no collisions as of 6-7 years after installation.

Huijser et al. (2009) conducted a project to evaluate the reliability of nine different animal detection systems at the same site under similar circumstances and to recommend minimum standards for system reliability. The detection systems were installed to detect horses and llamas that roamed in an enclosure. The percentage of intrusions (i.e., animal movements across the detection line) that were detected varied between 73% and 100%.The reliability of animal detection systems were influenced by a range of environmental conditions (high winds, higher temperatures, and higher humidity). The authors of the study determined that five of the nine systems tested met their recommended performance requirements for reliability. However, experiences with installation, operation, and maintenance showed that the robustness of animal detection systems may have to be improved before the systems can be deployed on a large scale.

Scope of the Problem

• L.P. Tardif& Associates Inc (2003). Final Report Collisions Involving Motor Vehicles and Large Animals in Canada. Report prepared for Transport Canada Road Safety Directorate. Retrieved from http://www.wildlifecollisions.ca/docs/d6acdb93dfabc8c6.pdf.
• Workplace Safety North, (2013). Oh Deer! Avoiding Wildlife on the Highway. Workplace Safety North. Retrieved from http://www.workplacesafetynorth.ca/news/news-post/oh-deer-avoiding-wildlife-highway

Evidence

• Minnesota Department of Transportation (2012). Deer Detection and Warning System Reducing Deer Vehicle Collisions with Technology. Minnesota Department of Transportation, St. Paul, MN. Retrieved from http://www.dot.state.mn.us/signs/deer.html
• Ontario Ministry of Transportation (2010). Ontario's Transportation Technology Transfer Digest — Summer 2010 — Vol. 16, Issue 3. Retrieved from http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/transtek/roadtalk/rt16-3/#a3
• Wood, C. (2013). Roadside Systems Detect Wildlife to Prevent Collisions. Government and Technology Justice and Public Health. Retrieved from http://www.govtech.com/public-safety/Roadside-Systems-Detect-Wildlife-to-Prevent-Collisions.html
• Huijser, M.P., McGowen, P., Fuller, J., Hardy, A., Kociolek, A., Clevenger, A.P., D. Smith D., & Ament, R. (2008). Wildlife-Vehicle Collision Reduction Study: Report to Congress. Western Transportation Institute Montana State University, Bozeman, MT. Prepared for Federal Highway Administration, McLean, VA. Report No. FHWA-HRT-08-034. Retrieved from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/08034/08034.pdf
• Huijser, M.P., Holland, T.D., Blank, M., Greenwood, M.C., McGowen, P.T., Hubbard B. & S. Wang, S. (2009). The Comparison of Animal Detection Systems in a Test-Bed: A Quantitative Comparison of System Reliability and Experiences with Operation and Maintenance. Western Transportation Institute, Montana State University. Prepared for Federal Highway Administration, Washington, D.C. & Montana Department of Transportation, Helena, Montana. Retrieved from http://www.wildlifecollisions.ca/docs/animaldetectionsystemsfinalapril2009huisijer.pdf