This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Roads and associated traffic have significant impacts on wildlife, from direct mortality caused by vehicle collisions to indirect effects when wildlife avoid roads, restricting access to important resources. Road mitigation measures such as constructing wildlife passages over or under the road with directional fencing have proven effective at reducing wildlife vehicle collisions while also enabling wildlife to safely cross the road. Highway mitigation projects are led by transportation agencies with a primary purpose of improving motorist safety. More recently, through the discipline of road ecology, considerations have included safe wildlife passage through transportation corridors. To prioritize road sections for mitigation, data sources include animal vehicle collision data collected by transportation agencies and connectivity models generated by wildlife professionals. We used a third data source, pronghorn observations collected by citizen scientists, and demonstrated its value to prioritize potential wildlife mitigation sites. Our results clearly demonstrate a misalignment of road mitigation sites using animal-vehicle collision data and those of rarer species of interest.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: