DEER-VEHICLE CRASH PATTERNS AND DEER CROSSING SIGN PLACEMENT

DEER-VEHICLE CRASH PATTERNS AND DEER CROSSING SIGN PLACEMENT by Xin Yi A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science (Civil and Environmental Engineering) at the UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON May 2003 (Updated August 2003) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my sincere appreciation to my advisor, Dr Keith K Knapp for his advice, encouragement, patience and support throughout my entire study and research activity at University of Wisconsin-Madison I would also like to thank Robert E Rolley from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and Matt Rauch, Richard Lange, Andrew Schilling, Timothy McClain, and Mary Kunkel from Wisconsin Department of Transportation for their valuable assistance with my data collection I would also like to thank Drs Bin Ran and David Noyce for their valuable suggestions and considerate comments Most importantly, I would like to express my appreciation to my father, my mother, and my friends who have encouraged and supported my study and made my work possible i ABSTRACT About 20,000 Deer-Vehicle Crashes (DVCs) are reported along the roadways of Wisconsin each year Deer crossing (DC) signs are widely used as countermeasures for DVCs throughout the United States and Wisconsin The typical assumption is that these signs designate a roadway segment that has a large number of DVCs and deer crossings Previous studies of DC signs have focused on the impacts of enhancements to them, and typically assumed that the signs were installed at a proper location No studies were found that evaluated the effectiveness of an ordinary DC sign The MUTCD provides some quantitative guidance for DC sign installation and a few jurisdictions have DVC related criteria for installation, but no studies were found that supported the basis of these criteria The purpose of this research is to help better define the DVC problem in Wisconsin, and investigate the DVC patterns within the selected study segments with DC signs Procedure guideline for the installation of DVC signs is also recommended Twelve deer carcass removal (DCR) and DVC frequencies and rates, along with DCR to DVC ratio, were calculated for each county in Wisconsin The magnitude of the DVC problems in Wisconsin was discussed by county First, the DCR to DVC ratios were analyzed by county Fifty-eight out of 71 counties that have available data had the DCR to DVC ratio between 0.93 and 4.90, while the others ranged from 6.53 to 49.33 Then the 12 DCR and DVC measures were ranked for the 58 counties The top ten counties within the 12 ii lists were discussed Sixteen counties were considered to have more than typical DVC issues were presented, and five counties were selected from the sixteen counties for this research, which included Adams, Dane, Sauk, Waupaca and Shawano County Seventy-six DC sign installation locations in the five counties were selected for this study The 1996 to 1998 DVC data within two miles of the DC sign pairs were then collected and analyzed The DC sign pairs were first grouped into 30 crash analysis sites (CASs), which included 38 sign pairs Twenty-two of the CASs had single DC sign pairs and eight included two DC sign pairs for each CAS The average overall length of the 30 CASs was 7.9 miles with an average roadway segment length between the DC signs of 3.5 miles, and an average length outside the DC signs of 4.4 miles Twenty-eight of the 30 CASs had higher DVC rates (DVCs per HMVMT) between the DC signs than the state average Twenty-five CASs had higher than state average DVC rates outside the DC signs The average DVC rate between the DC signs was more than five times the state average And the average DVC rate outside the DC signs was about four times the state average Similar traits were found when the CAS averages were compared to the county rate averages Twenty-two of the 30 sites had an average DVC rate between the DC signs that was higher than the county average, and 18 had an average DVC rate outside the DC signs higher than the county average However, DVC frequency (DVCs per mile per year) average between the DC signs was 14 times the state average, and the outside iii frequency average was 10 times the state average The average DVC frequencies between and outside the DC signs in all the CASs were also higher than the county averages These results indicate that this research considered sign locations with higher than average DVC frequencies and rates in the state and county The significance of the differences of the DVC frequency and rate between the CAS DC signs and these measures outside these signs was evaluated with a paired T-test The T-test results indicated that the DVC frequencies and rates between the DC signs of the CASs were significantly greater than those outside the DC signs A comparison of these differences for the single and multiple DC pair CASs showed that the average DVC frequency and rate differences for the multiple pair CASs, were 120 and 75 percent higher, respectively, than the average DVC comparable differences in the single DC sign pair CASs In other words, a greater reduction in DVCs from between the DC signs to outside the DC signs occurred on multiple DC sign pair roadway segments than on segments within a single DC sign pair Due to the small sample size, a non-parametric statistic analysis was also conducted on its significance, however no significant differences were found Additional research is needed to determine if multiple signs truly impact the DVC patterns between and near the signs The 38 sign pairs identified in this study were also categorized into positive, negative, and conflicting sign locations based on their DVC patterns Four DVC measures, the peak 1/4mile DVC frequency and rate, and the peak average DVC frequency and rate, were iv investigated for each segment of each site Fourteen DC sign pairs that had all four measures between the DC signs were selected as positive sign locations (PSLs) Based on these results, it was considered high probability that these locations were in the proper location They were the focus of the further safety measure investigation For example, all the PSLs had both between to outside DVC frequency and rate ratios higher than 1.16, with average of 2.15 and 2.52, respectively The average DVC frequency between the DC signs of the PSLs was 3.62 DVCs per mile per year, and the average DVC rate for the same segments was 244.5 DVCs per HMVMT These results were used in the creation of the DC sign installation guidance procedure recommended in this research Recommendations were made on the future research and data collection, such as between to outside sign DVC measure ratios for the entire state Most importantly, the procedure guidelines for DC sign installations were recommended when a DC sign installation request was received in Wisconsin The procedure limitations were also presented v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I ABSTRACT .II CHAPTER INTRODUCTION .1 PROBLEM STATEMENT RESEARCH OBJECTIVE ORGANIZATION CHAPTER LITERATURE REVIEW INTRODUCTION DVC TEMPORAL PATTERNS DVC SPATIAL PATTERNS DC SIGN INSTALLATIONS 10 DC SIGN EFFECTIVENESS 11 MEASURE OF SAFETY 18 SUMMARY 20 CHAPTER STUDY COUNTY AND SITE SELECTION 22 INTRODUCTION 22 SELECTION OF STUDY COUNTIES 22 DCR to DVC Ratios 24 County DCR and DVC Frequency and/or Rate Comparison 25 County Selection 31 SIGN INSTALLATION STUDY SITE SELECTION 32 SUMMARY 34 CHAPTER DATA ANALYSIS 36 INTRODUCTION 36 CAS DEFINITION 36 CAS ANALYSIS 42 CAS Crash Statistics 43 CAS Safety Evaluation .48 INDIVIDUAL SIGN PAIR ANALYSIS 54 vi Overall Group Pattern Summary .54 SUMMARY 61 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 65 CONCLUSIONS 65 RECOMMENDATIONS 70 APPENDIX A COUNTY DCR AND DVC MEASURE RANKINGS .79 APPENDIX B CRASH ANALYSIS SITE LOCATIONS AND DVC PATTERNS 89 REFERENCES .123 vii LIST OF TABLES TABLE COUNTY DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS A .23 TABLE FREQUENCIES, RATES AND DCR/DVC RATIO DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS A 26 TABLE COUNTIES WITH HIGHEST DCR FREQUENCY AND RATES A 28 TABLE COUNTIES WITH HIGHEST DVC FREQUENCY AND RATES A 28 TABLE SIGN PAIR DISTANCES BY COUNTY 34 TABLE CAS LOCATIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS .39 TABLE CAS LOCATIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS (CONT.) .40 TABLE CAS LOCATIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS (CONT.) .41 TABLE CAS DVC FREQUENCIES AND RATES A .44 TABLE 10 CAS DVC FREQUENCY AND RATES DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS 48 TABLE 11 STATE AND COUNTY AVERAGE DVC MEASURES (1996 TO 1998) 49 TABLE 12 CAS BETWEEN AND OUTSIDE PAIRED T-TEST DVC COMPARISON RESULTS B .52 TABLE 13 DVC FREQUENCIES, RATES AND BETWEEN TO OUTSIDE SIGN RATIOS FOR PSLS 60 viii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE DEER CROSSING SIGN (8) .2 FIGURE SUPPLEMENTAL SIGN (8) FIGURE DVC TEMPORAL PATTERNS BY MONTH IN WISCONSIN (4) .7 FIGURE LIGHTED “DEER XING” SIGN (25) .13 FIGURE ANIMATED DC SIGN WITH “DEER XING” SUPPLEMENTAL SIGN (25) 13 FIGURE THE LIGHTED, ANIMATED DEER CROSSING SIGN(7) .16 FIGURE COUNTY DCR TO DVC RATIOS 25 FIGURE ADAMS COUNTY DEER CROSSING SIGN LOCATIONS (32) 36 FIGURE DANE COUNTY DEER CROSSING SIGN LOCATIONS (32) FIGURE 10 SAUK COUNTY DEER CROSSING SIGN LOCATIONS (32) .32 FIGURE 11 SHAWANO COUNTY DEER CROSSING SIGN LOCATIONS (32) 32 FIGURE 12 WAUPACA COUNTY DEER CROSSING SIGN LOCATIONS (32) 34 FIGURE 13 EXAMPLE SINGLE (UPPER) AND MULTIPLE DC SIGN (LOWER) PAIR CASS 38 FIGURE 14 EXAMPLE DVC SIGN PAIR PATTERN (PEAK BETWEEN DC SIGN PAIR) 56 FIGURE 15 EXAMPLE DVC SIGN PAIR PATTERN (CONFLICTING PEAK LOCATIONS) .57 FIGURE 16 EXAMPLE DVC SIGN PAIR PATTERN (PEAK OUTSIDE DC SIGN PAIR) .58 FIGURE 17 DEER CROSSING SIGN INSTALLATION PROCEDURE GUIDANCE .78 ix 113 NOTE: STH = state highway, IH = Interstate Highway; Dots represent sign locations; “X” represents the end of CAS FIGURE B-23a Crash Analysis Site Location—Shaw-4 (32) 450 400 350 300 250 200 Total Number of DVCs 150 100 Average DVC Rate (DVCs per HMVMT) 50 Sign Sign Sign Study Segment Sign Sign Sign Sign Sign Study Segment NOTE: The crash patterns are from 1996 to 1998; The X-axis was divided into 1/4-mile sub-segments FIGURE B-23b DVC Rate (left) and Frequency (right) Patterns at CAS Shaw-4 114 NOTE: STH = state highway, IH = Interstate Highway; Dots represent sign locations; “X” represents the end of CAS 600 500 400 300 200 100 Average DVC Rate (DVCs per HMVMT) Sign Sign Study Segment FIGURE B-24a Crash Analysis Site Location—Waup-1 (32) 115 Number of DVCs Total Sign Sign Study Segment NOTE: The crash patterns are from 1996 to 1998; The X-axis was divided into 1/4-mile sub-segments FIGURE B-24b DVC Rate (left) and Frequency (right) Patterns at CAS Waup-1 116 NOTE: STH = state highway, IH = Interstate Highway; Dots represent sign locations; “X” represents the end of CAS FIGURE B-25a Crash Analysis Site Location—Waup-2 (32) 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 Total Number of DVCs 400 200 DVC Rate (DVCs per HMVMT) Average 0 Sign Study Segment Sign Sign Sign Study Segment NOTE: The crash patterns are from 1996 to 1998; The X-axis was divided into 1/4-mile sub-segments FIGURE B-25b DVC Rate (left) and Frequency (right) Patterns at CAS Waup-2 117 NOTE: STH = state highway, IH = Interstate Highway; Dots represent sign locations; “X” represents the end of CAS FIGURE B-26a Crash Analysis Site Location—Waup-3 (32) 450 400 350 300 250 200 Total Number of DVCs 150 100 Average 50 DVC Rate (DVCs per HMVMT) Sign Sign Sign Sign Study Segment Study Segment NOTE: The crash patterns are from 1996 to 1998; The X-axis was divided into 1/4-mile sub-segments FIGURE B-26b DVC Rate (left) and Frequency (right) Patterns at CAS Waup-3 118 NOTE: STH = state highway, IH = Interstate Highway; Dots represent sign locations; “X” represents the end of CAS 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 Average DVC Rate (DVCs per HMVMT) 50 Sign Sign Study Segment FIGURE B-27a Crash Analysis Site Location—Waup-4 (32) 119 Total Number of DVCs Sign Sign Study Segment NOTE: The crash patterns are from 1996 to 1998; The X-axis was divided into 1/4-mile sub-segments FIGURE B-27b DVC Rate (left) and Frequency (right) Patterns at CAS Waup-4 120 NOTE: STH = state highway, IH = Interstate Highway; Dots represent sign locations; “X” represents the end of CAS 1400 1200 1000 800 600 Total Number of DVCs 400 200 Average DVC Rate (DVCs per HMVMT) 0 Sign Study Segment Sign Sign Sign Study Segment FIGURE B-28a Crash Analysis Site Location—Waup-5 (32) NOTE: The crash patterns are from 1996 to 1998; The X-axis was divided into 1/4-mile sub-segments FIGURE B-28b DVC Rate (left) and Frequency (right) Patterns at CAS Waup-5 121 NOTE: STH = state highway, IH = Interstate Highway; Dots represent sign locations; “X” represents the end of CAS 12 700 10 600 500 400 300 Number of DVCs Total 200 Total Number of DVCs (1996 to 1998) 100 Sign Sign Sign Sign Study Segment Study Segment FIGURE B-29a Crash Analysis Site Location—Waup-6 (32) NOTE: The crash patterns are from 1996 to 1998; The X-axis was divided into 1/4-mile sub-segments FIGURE B-29b DVC Rate (left) and Frequency (right) Patterns at CAS Waup-6 122 NOTE: STH = state highway, IH = Interstate Highway; Dots represent sign locations; “X” represents the end of CAS 1200 1000 800 600 Total Number of DVCs 400 Average DVC Rate (DVCs per HMVMT) 200 Sign Sign Sign Sign Sign Sign Sign Sign Study Segment Study Segment FIGURE B-30a Crash Analysis Site Location—Waup-7 (32) NOTE: The crash patterns are from 1996 to 1998; The X-axis was divided into 1/4-mile sub-segments FIGURE B-30b DVC Rate (left) and Frequency (right) Patterns at CAS Waup-7 123 REFERENCES Gordon, D.F Deer-Elk Investigations: Evaluation of Deer-Highway Crossing Safety Measures Report W-038-R-23/Wk.Pl.04/Job 03, Game, Fish and Parks Department, Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Denver, Colorado, 1969, pp 18 U.S Department of Transportation Traffic Safety Facts, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S Department of Transportation, Washington D.C., 2000 Conover, M.R Monetary and Intangible Valuation of Deer in the United States Wildlife Society Bulletin, Vol 25, No 25, 1997, pp 298-305 Wisconsin Department of Transportation Wisconsin Traffic Crash Facts Bureau of Transportation Safety, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Madison, Wisconsin, 2000 Wisconsin Department of Transportation Ratio of Deer Removals to Reported Deer Crashes in Fiscal Year 2000 Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Madison, Wisconsin, 2000 Danielson, B., and M A Hubbard Literature Review for Assessing the Status of Current Methods of Reducing Deer-Vehicle Collisions The Task Force on Animal Vehicle Collisions, the Iowa Department of Transportation and the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, 1998 Pojar, T.M., D F Reed and T.C Reseigh Effectiveness of A Lighted, Animated Deer Crossing Sign Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol 39, No 1, 1975, pp 87-91 124 U.S Department of Transportation Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, Millennium Edition Federal Highway Administration, U.S Department of Transportation, Washington D.C, 2000 Allen, R.E., and D.R McCullough Deer-Car Accidents in Southern Michigan Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol 40, No 2, 1976, pp 317-325 10 Carbaugh, B., J.P Vaughan, E.D Bellis, and H.B Graves Distribution and Activity of White-Tailed Deer along an Interstate Highway Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol 39, No 3, 1975, pp 570-581 11 Hubbard, Michael W., Brent J Danielson, Richard A Schmitz Factors Influencing the Location of Deer-Vehicle Accidents in Iowa Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol 64, No 3, 2000, pp 707-713 12 Bashore, T L., W M Tzilkowski and E D Bellis Analysis of Deer-Vehicle Collision Sites in Pennsylvania Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol 49, No 3, 1985, pp 769-774 13 Peek, F W., and E D Bellis Deer Movements and Behavior Along an Interstate Highway Highway Research News, Vol 36, 1969, pp 36-42 14 Montgomery, G.G Nocturnal Movements and Activity Rhythms of White-tailed Deer Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol 27, No 3, 1963, pp 422-427 15 Bruinderink, G.W.T.A., and E Hazebroek Ungulate Traffic Collisions in Europe Conservation Biology, Vol 10, No 4, 1996, pp 1059-1067 125 16 Reed, D F., and T N Woodard Effectiveness of Highway Lighting in Reducing Deer-Vehicle Accidents Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol 45, No 3, 1981, pp.721-726 17 Gunther, K A., M J Biel, and H L Robison Factors Influencing the Frequency of Road Killed Wildlife in Yellowstone National Park Proceedings of the International Conference on Wildlife Ecology and Transportation, Report No FL-ER-69S58, Fort Myers, Florida, 1998 pp 32-42 18 Iverson, A.L and L.R Iverson Spatial and Temporal Trends of Deer Harvest and Deer-Vehicle Accidents in Ohio The Ohio Journal of Science, Vol 99, No 4, 1999, pp.84-94 19 Puglisi, M.J., J.S Lindzey, and E.D Bellis Factors Associated with Highway Mortality of White-Tailed Deer Journal of Wildlife Management, Vol 38, No 4, 1974 pp 799-807 20 Finder, R.A Relationships Between Landscape Patterns and White-Tailed Deer/Vehicle Accidents A Master’s Thesis Department of Zoology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois, 1997 21 Finder, R.A., J.L Roseberry, and A Woolf Site and Landscape Conditions at WhiteTailed Deer-Vehicle Collision Locations in Illinois Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol 44, 1999, pp.77-85 22 Washtenaw County Road Commission Placement of Deer Crossing Signs http://www.wcroads.org/rdcdeer.htm Accessed on Nov 23, 2002 126 23 Center for Transportation Research and Education Deer Crossing Signs Iowa Traffic Control Devices and Pavement Markings: A Manual for Cities and Counties Center for Transportation Research and Education Ames, Iowa, 2001 24 Minnesota Department of Transportation Traffic Engineering Manual Office of Traffic, Security and Operations, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Saint Paul, Minnesota, 2002 25 Pojar, T.M., D F Reed and T.C Reseigh Lighted Deer Crossing Signs And Vehicular Speed Report HS-011 935, Division of Games, Fish, and Parks, Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Denver, Colorado, 1971, pp.12 26 Gordon, K.M, S.H Anderson, B Gribble, and M Johnson Evaluation of the FLASH (Flashing Light Animal Sensing Host) System in Nugget Canyon, Wyoming Report FHWA-WY-01/03F, Wyoming Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Wyoming Department of Transportation, Cheyenne, WY, 2001 27 McShane, William R., Roger P Roess and Elena S Prassas Traffic Engineering, Second Edition Institute of Transportation Engineers, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 1998 28 Institute of Transportation Engineers Manual of Transportation Engineering Studies Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 1994 29 Wisconsin Department of Transportation County Maps Department of Transportation, Madison, Wisconsin 2000 127 30 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Deer-Vehicle Accident Data Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Madison, Wisconsin, 2000 31 Oakasa, Tanveer Deer-Vehicle Crash Models for Wisconsin Counties University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 2003 32 Delorme © Street Atlas 2003 USA (CD-ROM) Copyright © 2003 DeLorme, 2003 ... County Deer Crossing Sign Locations (32) FIGURE Dane County Deer Crossing Sign Locations (32) 31 32 FIGURE 10 Sauk County Deer Crossing Sign Locations (32) FIGURE 11 Shawano County Deer Crossing Sign. .. FIGURE Deer Crossing Sign (8) FIGURE Supplemental Sign (8) deer crossings and/ or crashes The existence of these signs suggests caution and reduced vehicle speeds PROBLEM STATEMENT DC signs are... with just the lighted words ? ?DEER XING” and a redesigned DC sign with deer animation and ? ?DEER XING” supplemental sign was considered (See Figure and 5) (25) The signs were installed south of