Survey: Public opinions on wildlife crossings

Roadkill is all too familiar for Americans. Most everyone has seen the unsettling – if not gruesome – death poses along the sides of highways and roadways: dead deer, coyotes, bears, turtles and more. Every single day, motor vehicles in the United States kill roughly one million vertebrate animals – more than 14 times the capacity of a standard NFL football stadium.

As humans, we are not immune to the dangers of wildlife collisions either. A study estimates that there are 1-2 million wildlife-vehicle collisions with large animals every year in the U.S., causing 26,000 human injuries, 200 human deaths and $8 billion in property damage, health care costs and lost work days.

One might assume that vehicle-wildlife collisions are anunavoidable risk. But increasingly, road planners are turning to wildlife crossings – bridges over and tunnels under America’s busy roads – to prevent such collisions.

There are more than one thousand wildlife crossings across the country, and every year brings new construction projects. The data tell us that these crossings are working. When placed in areas of known wildlife movement, wildlife crossings with elements such as fencing have reduced wildlife-vehicle collisions by up to 97%.

Reconnecting habitats

Crossings do more than prevent collisions. They help to reconnect habitat that has been bisected by roads full of fast-moving cars and trucks. When habitats are too small for hunting, grazing or finding a mate, animals often have no choice but to risk their lives by crossing busy roads and freeways.

In Florida, wildlife crossings have increased the gene flow of, and prevented vehicle collisions with, Florida black bears. At Banff National Park, studies show that crossings have a positive impact on wildlife by reducing roadkill, increasing food and shelter access, and even decreasing stress levels in wildlife. In Arizona, one wildlife overpass was used more than 6,000 times by bighorn sheep, bobcats, deer and coyotes between its construction in 2016 and spring 2020.

Survey asks: Do people know about crossings, and
what do they think?

Because wildlife crossings are a relatively new conservation initiative, we wanted to learn whether Americans are familiar with the concept, as well as whether they support crossings and the creation of more throughout the country. Additionally, we wanted to learn the extent to which Americans have experienced roadkill.

Key findings of the survey include:

• 37% of those surveyed were unfamiliar with the concept of wildlife crossings;
• Upon hearing the definition of a crossing, 87% of respondents supported the idea of building new crossings across the country, and in a separate question, 85% also supported a crossing project nearby or in their state;
• We presented information that crossings are expensive to build but also produce cost savings from reduced vehicle-animal collisions, and we then asked whether the savings needed to eventually surpass the costs of the crossing in order to be worth the effort. By nearly a three to one margin, 64%, respondents said that the crossing is worth it even if the savings never surpass the costs.
• Finally, 25% of those surveyed said that they had hit a large animal with their vehicle, either as a driver or passenger.

We conducted surveys in a variety of locations: the Southeast, Midwest, Southwest and West. We received answers from people in small towns in rural areas, in suburbs and in cities. We received input from people of all ages.

While we didn’t ask people about their politics, half of the locations we surveyed were represented by a Republican in their state legislature, and half by a Democrat. Support for wildlife crossings stayed consistently high, suggesting that this may be a rare issue that enjoys more consensus than disagreement.