Data on WVCs

Data on Wildlife-Vehicle Collisions

The importance of WVC data

Wildlife-vehicle collision (WVC) data are critical to helping researchers and practitioners formulate new approaches to road safety, wildlife management, road design, public education, and environmental impact to name just a few issue areas. To be usable, data should be accurate, detailed, robust, sufficiently broad, and consistently collected. Without quality data, it is difficult to identify problems and solutions to reduce WVCs. For instance, accurate data can help determine the impact of transportation systems on wildlife habitat, where to build a road, or what type of mitigation measures would be most effective.

Several organizations, educational institutions, businesses, and government agencies collect data on wildlife-vehicle collisions. However, the way in which data are gathered and communicated can vary widely across these groups. Hence it is important to recognize the advantages and potential limitations of these different data sources. This page provides a brief background about the benefits and limitations of existing WVC data, the need for more and better collection of WVC data, and current sources of WVC data.

Benefits and limitations of WVC data

The type of data gathered concerning wildlife-vehicle collisions is diverse. Organizations, agencies, or businesses may collect various information such as the species of wildlife involved in collisions, the location (spatial), time of day or season (temporal), the extent of damage to vehicles, the presence of mitigation measures, and any related injuries or fatalities to people among various other types of information. However, not all groups collect the same information nor collect it in the same manner. For instance, law enforcement may collect information related to location and injuries to people at the scene of a collision while conservation groups may collect species type and seasonal information about carcasses days after a collision. Even agencies with similar mandates and roles across Canada, such as law enforcement, may collect different data and use different recording and collection methods depending on the jurisdiction. To illustrate, police in one location who respond to a collision may record GPS coordinates and animal species through an electronic device as part of their collision report, while police in another location may estimate the location of a collision based on the nearest kilometer marker, only record that an animal was hit and not the species type, and may use a paper collision report form. For these reasons, data sources may be limited by the information that is available or the data may be difficult to compare across different jurisdictions.

The method of data collection also may differ, particularly depending on who collects data. Data can be gathered via professionals or through citizen-science strategies. Individuals with formal training in collecting information, such as research scientists or law enforcement officers, fall under professional data collection. Access to data gathered through this method is usually only available to other professionals or agencies and is often contingent upon the signing of an agreement between the custodian of the data and the user. In contrast, citizen-science data collection is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as “the collection and analysis of data relating to the natural world by members of the general public, typically as part of a collaborative project with professional scientists” (Oxford Dictionaries). Citizen-science data may be analyzed by citizens and professionals.

Both professional and citizen-science data collection have many benefits. Data gathered by research professionals, for example, often must meet specific study design requirements such as gathering observations for clearly defined events (e.g., deer usage of animal over passes from November to April) or obtaining data not accessible to the public (e.g., injuries and fatalities to people involved in collisions). Data gathered under these rigorous and controlled methods or gathered from specific sources typically increases the precision and reliability of analyses and results.

Data gathered by citizen-scientists are usually collected and submitted voluntarily by the public. Information may be collected through online questionnaires, mobile device applications, or paper/fax submissions. Using volunteers provides multiple means of reporting and enables organizations and agencies to gather larger amounts of data at little to no cost. This method is particularly useful when attempting to gather field-based information that spans great distances and/or time periods, or requires observations of unpredictable events.

There are also important limitations associated with both methods of data collection. Although widely used, data gathered by some professionals, such as law enforcement or highway maintenance contractors, are not required to meet precise scientific methods and thus their data may not be rigorously collected or accurate. Other professionals, such as researchers, are often limited by time, location, or funding in order to collect wide-ranging information or they simply may not be present when an incident occurs. On the other hand, people who collect citizen-science data may not be trained properly in standard data collection methods and may report inaccurate information. Although this last issue is a potential risk, most questionnaires ask for specific information and, when the public is provided with proper training to collect evidence, they often gather data similarly to professionals. Together, citizen-science data collection and professional data collection can help fill gaps in knowledge and research concerning WVCs.

Availability and accuracy of WVC data

Access to either raw (original) or processed (manipulated) data is dependent upon the owner of the data. Some groups may make their raw or processed data available to the public while others may make it available contingent upon the signing of an agreement for its use.

In terms of WVCs, one of the most commonly used sources of data that incorporates large geographic areas is data from police-reported motor vehicle collisions. Almost all jurisdictions across Canada report animal involvement on police collision forms, which are entered into a provincial or territorial database. This data, however, can vary where some agencies may only report that an animal was involved while other agencies may report species type and other animal-related details. Transport Canada collects these data from provinces and territories as well as from provincial insurance agencies to produce annual national statistics. However, due to variations in reporting from the different jurisdictions, Transport Canada generalizes some information such as classifying both wild and domestic animals as simply an ‘animal’ collision.

In general, wildlife-vehicle collisions tend to be under-reported for several reasons:

• first, drivers often do not report collisions with animals (particularly for smaller or less serious incidents);
• second, carcasses may be removed and consumed by people and/or predators; and,
• third, injured animals may move away from the road to die elsewhere.

In contrast, some instances of over-reporting can occur through insurance claims, such as drivers who may claim a collision was a result of an animal instead of due to other causes, or when multiple observers to a collision report the same incident to a citizen-science database. Although much less common in comparison to under-reporting, over-reporting sometimes occurs thus adding to some of the complications in accurate WVC data.

The need for more and better WVC data collection

Despite the difficulty of collecting WVC data, there are many ways it can be improved. Groups, agencies, businesses, and interested others can work together to establish standardized data collection methods in a given locale. This would improve comparisons and allow for broader analyses. New technologies such as applications for mobile devices can be used to make data capture easier, more accurate, and timely among citizens and professionals. Refer to the Mobile Device Apps table below for a list of some apps that have been launched or are under development. WVC data collection also requires a broader framework to connect the various Canadian researchers, practitioners, and public to jointly promote their interdependent objectives towards improving wildlife-transportation interactions. Such efforts would help to reduce knowledge gaps and provide more direction for the field.

 

---

Sources of WVC Data

Following are tables of different sources of data related to WVCs. For a detailed compilation of various sources of Canadian WVC data, refer to the Wildlife-Vehicle Collisions in Canada: A Review of the Literature and a Compendium of Existing Data Sources (Vanlaar et al. 2012a).

Click on a table title below to active the drop-down panel.

Public sector data: Coroners and medical examiners

Public sector data: Federal agencies

Public sector data: Provincial insurers

Public sector data: Other public agencies

Private and Non-Profit sector data

International data

Mobile device apps

Back to top

---

Sources