Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

EFFECTS OF CONCRETE
BARRIERS ON WILDLIFE
CROSSING IN THE WEST
KOOTENAY REGION,
BRITISH COLUMBIA

Dani Lounsbury
RFW 271
Selkirk College
Faculty Advisor: Doris Hausleitner
February 29, 2020
Page 1 of 17

Disclaimer
The contents provided on the following pages are student work produced as part of the written
evaluation in the diploma program in the School of Environment and Geomatics, Selkirk College,
Castlegar, British Columbia, Canada. This work obtained a minimum assessment grade of “C” (60%) and
met the requirements of the assignment for which it was completed.

The author has provided written permission to include the following academic work in the Selkirk
College Online Repository (SCOLR) and retains full copyright over their work. Canadian Copyright law
applies to use of this work.

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

1. Abstract
I explored the effects that animal vehicle collisions have on vehicle operators as well as wildlife
species through extensive literature based research. I also examined the relationship between
roadways and wildlife, and specifically how roadways can isolate populations, fragment habitat,
and fragment territories, as well as how structures along roadways impact animal crossing. I
conducted a pilot study along the 42.6 kilometer stretch of Highway 3A from Castlegar to
Nelson, British Columbia. The field work involved using ArcGIS’s Survey123 application to
record roadkill data points over a four-month study period. The objective of this study were to
determine the animal species most frequently stuck along this stretch of highway, identify
roadkill hotspots, determine if there is an increase in the number of animals hit when there are
concrete barriers present along the sides of this highway, and to determine an effective roadkill
mitigation technique that could be implemented along Highway 3A. From the pilot study I
determined there is no obvious relationship between the number of animals struck and concrete
barriers being present along the side of the highway. From my study I found wild turkeys to be
the most frequently hit species, followed by black bears and squirrels. I identified and mapped
out two prominent roadkill hotspots along Highway 3A and determined through background
research that the most effective roadkill mitigation technique would be an overpass at each
roadkill hotspot with at least five kilometers of fencing on either side of the entrances to the
overpasses. I concluded that the relationship between roadways and wildlife needs to be better
understood and that similar future studies would be valuable to better understand these
relationships. It would be valuable for the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure to invest
more money into implementing more roadkill mitigation techniques such as crossing structures
combined with fencing to prevent future vehicle-animal collisions.

2. Introduction
Animal vehicle collisions have negative effects on both wildlife and people. According to
wildlifecollsions.ca, it is estimated that, on average, three people are killed due to vehicle animal
collisions, 6,100 animals are recorded as dead, and 18,300 animal deaths will go unrecorded in
British Columbia (BC) every year (The Facts…c2004-2019). According to drivesmartbc.ca,
8000 collisions happen every year in BC resulting in ICBC paying out more than twenty million
dollars for the insurance claims and the Ministry of Transportation paying out more than six
Page 2 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

hundred thousand dollars in clean-up fees (Wildlife Collisions…c2004-2019). Looking at these
statistics and the lack of studies done on ways to mitigate animal-vehicle collisions, it is obvious
to me that there should be more research on this problem.
This paper will explore the impact that animal-vehicle collisions have on wildlife populations,
different approaches scientists have taken to determine the causes of roadkill incidents, and
whether or not certain mitigation strategies are actually keeping wildlife off roadways. Included
in this examination is the results of a pilot study I conducted on the relationship between roadkill
and concrete barriers in the West Kootenay region. I’ll conclude this research paper with
recommendations for future management of West Kootenay roads to mitigate the incidence of
animal-vehicle collisions. The main goal of my pilot study was to determine whether or not there
is a relationship between concrete barriers and animal crossing. The objectives of my study are
to:
•

Determine the animal species that are most frequently struck by vehicles on Highway
3A between Castlegar and Nelson, British Columbia.

•

Identify roadkill hotspots along that same stretch of highway.

•

Determine if there is an increase in animals hit when there are concrete barriers present
along the roadside.

•

Determine a potential effective roadkill mitigation technique for Highway 3A.

3. Background Information
We lose many wildlife species to animal-vehicle collisions in Canada every day, for a variety of
reasons that are not totally clear to scientists because of the lack of studies and understanding on
the topic. It appears that many studies document the incidence and types of roadkill species but
do not focus on the reasons why these animals have been struck. A study conducted by Plante et
al. (2018), for example, demonstrated that roads are a serious killer for a variety of species in
Canada. The authors collected roadkill data along Highway 175, located between Jacques-Cartier
National Park and the Montmorency Forest in Quebec. During the three-year study period the
authors observed a total of 839 animals killed due to being struck by a vehicle (Plante et al.
2018). A similar study, also in Canada by Bishop et al. (2013), focused on the negative effects
that roadways have on birds. They found that 157 different species of birds and at least 14,287
Page 3 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

individuals were killed per day per km in Canada. On one to two lane roads 1,167 birds are killed
per 100 km during the 122-day breeding season (Bishop et al. 2013). They concluded that, in
Canada, every year approximately 0.28% of our total land birds are killed due to roadkill (Bishop
et al. 2013). This is relevant because it puts into perspective just how much wildlife we lose
throughout Canada due to roadkill, as well as why it is so important to obtain information on the
relationships between wildlife and roadways.
Certain species are negatively affected by roads on multiple scales because of a lack of
understanding of the relationship between wildlife crossing and roadways. Habitat
fragmentation, population isolation, and territory fragmentation, are some of the secondary
effects roadways have on wildlife. For instance, Sunga et al. (2017) modelled the effects of
human development on badger burrow placement and found that road density within home
ranges of badgers ranged from 0.48-3.52 km². The researchers tagged and tracked nine badgers
and three of these badgers were killed due to vehicle collisions (Sunga et al. 2017). They
concluded that road mortality was the leading cause of death for radio tracked badgers in this
study and likely for badger carcasses found throughout Ontario. Roads affected badgers at
multiple spatial scales, including burrow site selection, and movement within their home ranges
(Sunga et al. 2017). A study conducted by Find’o et al. (2019) examined brown bear (Ursus
arctos) roadkill in Slovakia over an 895 km stretch of road. The authors concluded that high
traffic areas (defined as having volumes exceeding >4000 vehicles every 24 hours) impeded the
bears’ movements and that the likelihood of collisions increased with these higher traffic
volumes (Find’o et al. 2019). A study by Howell et al. (2019) concluded that roadways can
isolate individual spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata) populations and, in doing so, drastically
decrease the population’s intrinsic growth, ultimately leading to population extinction. Four
turtles were found dead over the three-year study period due to vehicle collisions, meaning 13%
of the entire North Wetland Complex turtle population was lost (Howell et al. 2019). There is a
need to better understand the relationship between wildlife habitat and roadways so that in the
future, roads can be constructed in a more accommodating way for wildlife, allowing more
connectivity for different wildlife populations.
The need to better understand the relationship between animals and the structures alongside
roads is important. Are the structures installed alongside roads a hindrance to animals crossing
Page 4 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

the road or do these barriers help prevent roadkill from happening? A relevant study by Kreling
et al. (2019) demonstrated a relationship between artificial streetlights and fencing and the
amount of roadkill. A total of 473 animals were killed by vehicle collisions over a 10.5-year
period on a 50 km stretch of road in the United States. Their original inference that fencing
would prevent roadkill was actually incorrect. They concluded that fencing length was related to
roadkill numbers (Kreling et al. 2019). This study demonstrates the need to better understand the
relationship between structures alongside our roadways and how they might have an effect on
wildlife crossing.
A study in British Columbia was conducted by Eye et al. (2018) to explore the relationship
between exclusion fencing and the effects it has on the Northern Pacific Rattlesnake (Crotaus
oreganus), Great Basin Gopher Snake (Pituophis catenifer deserticola), and Western Yellowbellied Racer (Coluber constrictor mormon). The rattlesnake and the gopher snake are listed as
threatened in Canada and the racer has been recommended for listing as threatened (Eye et al.
2018). In order to mitigate negative human-snake conflicts a four-kilometer exclusion fence was
built in 2006 to separate natural snake habitat from high human traffic areas (Eye et al. 2018).
But, in 2006, after initial construction of the fence, dead snakes were observed along a newly
constructed section of the fence (Eye et al. 2018). The fence was responsible for 33% of snake
mortalities. The specific section of the fence where the most snake mortalities were observed
runs parallel to a lake, restricting access to riparian habitat and allowing the snakes to rehydrate,
hunt, and seek shelter from extreme summer heat (Eye et al. 2018). The authors found that
relatively active species of snakes, or snakes that migrate, are more likely to encounter these
fences and other disturbances, and become isolated from crucial resources (Eye et al. 2018). This
study highlights the lack of understanding of the relationship between mitigation techniques and
select species. It also confirms the lack of understanding of the behaviour of snakes and that
these mitigation techniques and roads alike, can both cause unintentional habitat fragmentation.
There isn’t a lot of information readily available that compares the effectiveness of roadkill
mitigation techniques available on the market and studies previously done on the topic are
lacking certain pertinent information on the before and after effects of these techniques. The
problem with these roadkill mitigation techniques is that they are typically chosen on the basis of
cost and that there is little reliable information about the relative effectiveness of these measures
Page 5 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

in reducing roadkill numbers (Rytwinski et al. 2016). The reason why choosing the right
mitigation technique can be so challenging for decision makers is because studies that evaluate
the effectiveness of these mitigation techniques often lack comparisons between impact sites and
control sites, data collection before the mitigation technique is applied, replication in space and
time, and randomization of impact and control sites across the pool of potential study sites
(Rytwinski et al. 2016). Rytwinski et al. (2016) determined that mitigation techniques reduce
roadkill by approximately 40% when compared to controls. The authors determined that fences,
with or without crossing structures reduced roadkill by 54%. Fencing alone was determined to
reduce roadkill by 86%, and when combined with crossing structures, reduced roadkill by 51%
which is likely due to the fact that when fencing is paired with crossing techniques, the fences
tend to be shorter than when compared to fencing-only designs, which tend to cover longer
stretches of roads (Rytwinski et al. 2016). The author also determined that crossing structures
were not effective at reducing roadkill unless fences were present. The author determined that
more expensive mitigation techniques were more effective at reducing roadkill than the more
inexpensive techniques. For example, Rytwinski et al. (2016) observed an 83% reduction in
roadkill for fencing with crossing structures, and a 57% reduction for animal detection systems,
compared to 1% for wildlife reflectors. This study demonstrates the importance of better
understanding the effectiveness of these roadkill mitigation techniques, as well as the importance
of understanding that the cheapest mitigation technique is not the most effective, and that in the
future we should invest more money into proper mitigation techniques. As a result of these
mitigation techniques, not only will wildlife be better protected, but so will the people operating
vehicles on these roadways.
4. Pilot Study

4.1 Methods
4.1.1. Study Area
My study area is located on Highway 3A, from 301 Frank Beinder Way (Selkirk College) to the
intersection between Granite Road and Government Road in Nelson, British Columbia (Figure 1). It is a
42.6km length of a two-lane highway. Along this stretch of highway there are several concrete barriers
along one or both sides of the road to help prevent drivers from driving off the shoulder of the road. This

Page 6 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

stretch of highway runs along the Kootenay River and a set of train tracks. The highway runs beside
several rural homes, a few farms, and other types of industrial development.
My study area is located in the Very Dry Warm Interior Cedar-Hemlock (ICHxw) BEC Zone, with the
Very Dry Warm Interior Cedar-Hemlock Warm Phase (ICHxwa) adjacent to it (Mackillop et al. 2016).
This BEC Zone is commonly made up of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), ponderosa pine (Pinus
ponderosa), and pine grass (Calamagrostis rubescens). But western redcedar (Thuja plicata), grand fir
(Abies grandis), and western white pine (Pinus monticola) are also abundant in this unit (Mackillop et al.
2016). According to Mackillop et al. (2016) this BEC zone is characterized by high shrub cover of
mallow ninebark (Physocarpus malvaceus), oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor), mock-orange
(Philadelphus lewisii), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), beaked hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), Oregongrape (Mahonia aquifolium), and Douglas maple (Acer glabrum). At some points along Highway 3A
there is dense forest cover which provides cover for a variety of species of wildlife and could potentially
make wildlife alongside the roadway harder to see.
This BEC zone is habitat to a variety of species at risk such as Lewis’s woodpecker (Melanerpes lewis),
western screech-owl (Megascops kennicottii kennicottii), great blue heron (Ardea herodias Herodias),
and little brown myotis (Myotis lucifugus) (Mackillop et al. 2016). In the ICHxw BEC zone you can also
find a variety of at-risk reptiles in rocky outcrops and cliff areas such as the western skink (Plestiodon
skiltonianus), northern rubber boa (Charina bottae), and North American racer (Coluber constrictor)
(Mackillop et al. 2016). The BEC unit also provides key winter ranges for mule deer (Odocoileus
hemionus), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), elk (Cervus elaphus), and bighorn sheep (Ovis
canadensis) (Mackillop et al. 2016). It is also important to note that this BEC unit also has the highest
bird diversity in the region (Mackillop et al. 2016).

4.1.2. Data Collection
For my study I collected field data as well as relied on volunteers to collect data on my behalf. I had four
volunteers collecting data starting from October 19, 2019 until February 9, 2020. These people
volunteered to collect data because they commuted every day from Nelson to Castlegar for school. They
drove the study area typically once in the morning and once in the early afternoon or evening. The most
efficient method of data collection was done by a passenger in a vehicle to ensure accurate data collection
as well as the safety of the person collecting the data. If data collection was done by one individual then it
was safest for that person to pull off on a wide shoulder of the road or a pullout and turn on their hazards
to ensure their own safety, and to get accurate data collection. Data was collected by recording roadkill
points along Highway 3A on a tablet that is GPS enabled. I used ArcGIS’s Survey123 application to

Page 7 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

collect the data points. It is important to note that in order to be able to collect data the user is required to
download the Survey123 application as well as my survey onto their device.
Components of my survey include:
•

Automatically updated time and date of collection

•

GPS location of the data point

•

A required field to fill out the name of the person collecting the data

•

A dropdown menu to select the species found. There is the option for an ‘other’ category if the
species wasn’t listed in the dropdown menu, as well as ‘unknown’ if the volunteer can’t properly
identify the species.

•

There was also a question asking whether or not there was a concrete barrier present alongside the
road. The answers included ‘yes’, ‘yes, one on each side’, and ‘none present’.

•

The final fillable area of the survey was a comment section where users could choose to add any
other relevant information to their survey submission.

4.1.3. Data Analysis
Each time a data point was collected with my survey the information was sent to me through the ArcGIS
Survey123 website. Once I closed my survey, I could see all the data points collected, what species were
found, whether there were barriers present, and the number of each species that had been found.
I used ArcMap to build the map and used a high-quality base map layer provided by ArcMap to be able to
see the concrete barriers from a satellite view. I then created a line feature class by tracing the barriers I
could see on the image that were located in close proximity to a roadkill data point.

4.2 Results
There was a total of fifteen roadkill points documented using my survey from October 22, 2019 to
November 27, 2019. The roadkill species that were documented the most were wild turkeys (Meleagris
gallopavo), followed by squirrels (Sciuridae sp.) and black bears (Ursus americanus). From the survey it
was determined that along the side of Highway 3A where a mule deer carcass was found, there was one
concrete barrier present. There were also two other occasions were a concrete barrier was present
alongside the highway where two turkey carcasses were found. There were two key roadkill hotspots
identified on Highway 3A that were approximately three to four kilometers in length (Figure 1). Other
than the three cases recorded in the survey, the rest of the roadkill points don’t have a concrete barrier
present alongside the road. The other species identified during the survey period included a domestic cat

Page 8 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

(Felis catus), a raccoon (Procyon lotor), a striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), a song bird, and a hare
(Lepus sp).

5. Discussion
From the results of this pilot study, the presence and distribution of concrete barriers do not appear to be
related to a higher incidence of wildlife killed by vehicles along Highway 3A. In general, these roadside
barriers tend to be in areas that do not appear to be conducive for wildlife corridors or habitat and are less
than one meter in height and, therefore, easy for large mammals to pass over. This is likely due to the fact
that these barriers are typically placed in areas near bridges and sharp corners with steep embankments to
one side of the road. It can be speculated that areas where these barriers are located don’t offer very
desirable habitat due to the steepness of the slopes and the amount of infrastructure such as bridges or
intersections where these barriers are placed.
Wild turkeys are a commonly found species in the West Kootenay region, and as a result, are quite
commonly struck by vehicles in this region. Wild turkeys were the most commonly killed wildlife species
during the study likely due to their large numbers in the region, the ease of identification of this
distinctive large bird, and their slow and often unpredictable movements. Another source determined that
pheasants, which are similar ground dwelling birds to turkeys, are commonly killed due to their short
flight distances and relatively small brains (Unknown…2017). The fact that turkeys were the most
frequently struck species could be linked to a variety of reasons, one of which, is the fact that wild turkeys
are common in the area. The wild turkey population was estimated to be approximately 4000-5000 birds
in 2004 (Wild Turkey…c2015-c2020)), and has likely increased since that time because the species has
expanded throughout the Kootenay region (Wild Turkey…c2015-c2020). Other reasons could be that
they are observed regularly along roadways or that they are more noticeable when hit due to their large
size and characteristic appearance when compared to other birds and small mammals, therefore they are
more likely to be recorded.
Black bears were the only bears found during the time of my roadkill survey likely due to their high
population in the West Kootenay region and the timing of the survey. At the time of my survey for
roadkill, during October and November, fall is an active time for black bears to begin bulking up fat
reserves to be able to survive hibernation. Bears go through a phase of nonstop eating and drinking in
order to gain weight in the fall called hyperphagia (When Bears…c2018-c2020). My theory is that during
these fall months the black bear roadkill numbers are more likely to increase due to the active survival
driven nature of the black bears at this time. I believe their active nature during fall makes them more
desperate to find food, and as a result, more active and vulnerable to being struck by a vehicle. It is also

Page 9 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

necessary to note that black bears are more easily habituated to people than grizzly bears are. This is
likely why they are more likely to be struck by a vehicle than a grizzly bear would be. Although grizzly
bears can be found in the West Kootenay region (Grizzly Bear…c2012-c2020), they are less likely to be
struck by a vehicle due to their inherent nature to avoid people populated areas. It can be speculated that
the reason why black bears are recorded frequently when compared to other species is due to their large
size and characteristic appearance. People would be more likely to notice a road killed black bear than say
a road killed songbird or rodent.
From my pilot study I found two roadkill hotspots located along Highway 3A, each of which ranges from
two to three kilometers in length, and contains at least four roadkill points within each area. From the data
I mapped two prominent roadkill hot spots along Highway 3A (Figure 1). Each roadkill hot spot has
about four roadkill points spread about half a kilometer to one kilometer apart. Highway 3A is a pretty
bendy road with dense trees to either side of the highway in sections, and steep rocky embankments that
reduce visibility for drivers as they drive around corners. According to Ogletree et al. (2019) curves and
hills are factors that lead to roadkill hotspots due to the limited line of sight, particularly in the evening or
at night. A study by Williams et al. (2019) determined that species abundance, road placement, and
behaviour can play a role in roadkill rates. Williams et al. (2019) also found that roadkill counts are
higher in areas of the animal’s preferred habitat. From this observation, one can speculate that my roadkill
hotspots are potentially wildlife corridors or just ideal habitat areas for the species observed during my
survey. Certain species are scavengers and rely on carrion to survive, and what better source for food than
roadkill? For example, the striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis) that was recorded was located right next to a
hare (Lepus sp.) carcass . As the striped skunk is a scavenger and typically an opportunistic species when
it comes to feeding, I think it was likely feeding on the rabbit when it too was struck by a vehicle.
The estimated number of roadkill along Highway 3A is a conservative estimate of the actual amount of
wildlife struck because there are likely many animal carcasses that go unnoticed or are otherwise
unrecorded. It is easy to miss certain vehicle-killed species due to their small size or because of the
location where they were struck. It is also important to note that after being struck, some animals drag
themselves into the trees or ditch to die because they are frightened and trying to escape the predator (a
vehicle). It is also important to note that because my volunteers and myself were not travelling at night,
there was likely roadkill that went unrecorded because we weren’t on the road at the time it was struck.
The timing of the survey could have affected the results as well. There were certainly data points that
were missed because my volunteers and I were committed to other activities, such as attending college
courses. Furthermore, I have observed that in British Columbia, the roadkill cleanup services are efficient
and dead wildlife can be cleaned up within a matter of an hour or two and, therefore, it could be easily
Page 10 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

missed. It is also potential that as fall turned to winter the density of wildlife likely decreased. For
example, black bears which were recorded during early fall would have likely been hibernating before I
ended my survey in February, hence, less bear mortalities to be recorded.
From this pilot study, as well as from extensive background research, I have determined that the best way
to reduce the numbers of future vehicle-animal collisions along Highway 3A would be to install an
overpass at each of the two roadkill hotspots, complete with at least five kilometers of fencing on each
side of the overpasses (resulting in a total of ten kilometers of fencing on each side of the road) to ensure
wildlife would be directed to use the overpasses instead of the highway to cross. Rytwinski et al. (2016)
determined that fencing less than five kilometers in length was less effective in reducing large mammalvehicle collisions than fencing greater than five kilometers in length. According to Rytwinski et al.
(2016), the cheaper alternatives such as signage and wildlife reflectors are far less effective when
compared to the more expensive techniques such as overpasses or mitigation fencing. Although an
overpass would be far more expensive compared to the cheaper, more commonly used alternatives, it is
proven to be the most effective way to minimize vehicle-animal collisions. The use of an overpass and
mitigation fencing would also save money spent on roadkill cleanup and insurance claims made to ICBC,
so over time the overpass would potentially pay itself off as well as potentially prevent fatal vehicleanimal collisions from happening.

6. Future Recommendations
I think it is very worth-while to further study the relationship between wildlife and our roadways, as well
as to better understand the effectiveness of roadkill mitigation techniques. Transportation agencies, such
as the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure should work towards investing in more effective
roadkill mitigation techniques such as overpasses combined with fencing, instead of opting for the most
inexpensive technique that just isn’t as effective at mitigating vehicle-animal collisions. In doing this our
roadways will not only be safer for wildlife, but also for drivers. It is important for the Ministry of
Transportation and Infrastructure to realize that the cost-benefit of these more costly mitigation
techniques have shown high returns on investment, with ongoing benefits exceeding their cost over time
(Rytwinski et al. 2016). This means that the money spent to build this mitigation technique would be paid
off by the money saved in roadkill cleanup fees, ICBC payments, and even medical bills, not to mention
the pricelessness of the potential lives being saved by preventing fatal collisions.

6.1 Limitations
The limitations I encountered while doing this roadkill pilot study are important to discuss so someone
who wishes to replicate my project can avoid some of the challenges I faced. Unlike me, I think the

Page 11 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

person conducting this work in the future should live in Nelson and commute daily to Castlegar for
school or work. It would be far more practical because the person carrying out the study would be driving
to and from Castlegar at least twice a day, once in the morning and once in the evening, and would be
able to collect more data than someone who has to go out of their way to drive from Castlegar to Nelson
at more sporadic times. This would result in more consistent data collection and not having to rely on
volunteers to do data collection. Although citizen scientists and volunteers do play a role, there are certain
downsides such as lack of commitment and inconsistency in the data that can occur from the use of
volunteers.
The earlier this kind of study can be started, the better because it will allow for a larger window for data
collection to occur, and as a result, more data points and more results to examine. Beginning data
collection in early spring and carrying it out until late fall would be best to avoid having to collect data
during the winter months. During spring to fall, animals are giving birth to babies, bears are fattening up
for winter, and overall wildlife tends to be more active during this time compared to winter time. Not only
is it harder to collect data in the winter due to poor visibility and poor road conditions, but also roadkill is
more likely to be plowed off the road by a snow plow before being recorded. Also, certain species such as
bears and certain squirrels also go into hibernation, resulting in less wildlife active and on the roads.
From my experience, trying to mark concrete barriers along roadways in the field is not the most efficient
way to map them out. Initially I had attempted to mark the concrete barriers along the highway using a
line drawing feature on a tablet using Avenza, but discovered that this method was very unsafe due to a
lack of safe pullouts along the highway, heavy traffic, and the large numbers of concrete barriers in
locations that were too challenging to walk and mark. I tried staying in my vehicle as a passenger and
driving by the concrete barriers to mark them, but unfortunately the application couldn’t keep up to the
eighty-kilometer speed of the vehicle. From my experience, using a base map on ArcMap was the safest
and most practical way to be able to view and then create a line feature class of the concrete barriers in
order to map them out.

Page 12 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

Figure 1. Roadkill hotspots identified along Highway 3A from Castlegar to Nelson, BC.

Page 13 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

REFERENCES
2017. Avian Biology Research [Internet]. [cited 2020 Mar 27]; 10(4): p265-266. Available from:
10.1098/rsos.170617
Bishop CA, Brogan JM. 2013. Estimates of Avian Mortality Attributed to Vehicle? Collisions in
Canada. Avian Conservation and Ecology [Internet]. [cited 2019 Oct 22]; 8(2):2.
Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ACE-00604-080202.
Chutter, M. 2015. Wild Turkey in Davidson, P.J.A., R.J. Cannings, A.R. Couturier, D. Lepage,
and C.M. Di Corrado (eds.). The Atlas of the Breeding Birds of British Columbia,
2008-2012. Bird Studies Canada. Delta, B.C.
http://www.birdatlas.bc.ca/accounts/speciesaccount.jsp?sp=WITU&lang=en [29
Feb 2020]
Environmental Reporting BC. 2012. Grizzly Bear Population Status in B.C. State of
Environment Reporting, Ministry of Environment, British Columbia, Canada.
Available from:
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/soe/indicators/plants-and-animals/grizzly-bears.html
Eye DM, Maida JR, Larsen KW, Bishop CA. 2018. Snake mortality and cover board
effectiveness along exclusion fencing in British Columbia, Canada. Canadian
Field-Naturalists [Internet]. [cited 2019 Nove 30]; 132(1):30-35. Available from:
https://www.canadianfieldnaturalist.ca/index.php/cfn/article/view/2031/1989
Find’o S, Skuban M, Kajiba M, Chalmers J, Kalas M. 2019. Identifying attributes associated
with brown bear (Urus arctos) road-crossing and roadkill sites. Canadian Journal of

Page 14 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

Zoology [Internet]. [cited 2019 Oct 22]; 97(2):156-164. Available from:
dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjz-2018-0088.
Howell HJ, Seigel RA. 2019. The Effects of Road Mortality on Small, Isolated Turtle
Populations. Journal of Herpetology [Internet]. [cited 2019 Oct 22]; 53(1):39-46.
Available from: https://bioone.org/journals/Journal-of-Herpetology.
Kreling SE, Gaynor KM, Coon CA. 2019. Roadkill distribution at the wildland-urban interface.
The Journal of Wildlife Management [Internet]. [cited 2019 Nov 13]; 83(6): 14271436. Available from: https://doiorg.ezproxy.library.selkirk.ca/10.1002/jwmg.21692
MacKillop, D.J. and A.J. Ehman. 2016. A field guide to site classification and identification for
southeast British Columbia: the south-central Columbia Mountains. Prov. B.C.,
Victoria, B.C. Land Manag. Handb. 70.
Ogletree KA, Mead AJ, Boitet ER. 2019. Identifying roadkill hotspots using a running average.
Georgia Journal of Science [Internet]. [cited 2020 Mar 19]; 77(3): 1-6. Available
from:
https://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=12&sid=ac46231b-3ab64959-936c-892e7d6e5fcd%40pdc-v-sessmgr02
Plante J, Belanger-Smith K, Spanowicz AG, Clevenger AP, Jaegar JA. 2018. Road mortality locations of
small and medium-sized mammals along a partly fenced highway in Quebec, Canada, 20122015. Data in Brief [Internet]. [cited 2019 Oct 22]; 21:1209-1215. Available from:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.10.048

Page 15 of 17

Danielle Lounsbury

Selkirk College

Rytwinski T, Soanes K, Jaegar JA, Fahrig L, Findlay S, Houlahan J, Van der Ree R, Van der
Grift E. 2015. How effective is road mitigation at reducing road kill? A metaanalysis PloS One [Internet]. [cited 2020 Feb 29]; 11(11): e0166941. Available
from: 10.1371/journal.pone.0166941 No
Williams, Collinson S, Patterson-Abrolat w, Marneweck C, Swanepoel D, Lourens H. 2019.
Using road patrol data to identify factors associated with carnivore roadkill counts
[Internet]. [cited 2020 Mar 27]; PeerJ7:e6650. Available from:
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6650
Sunga J, Sayers J, Cottenie K, Kyle CJ, Ethier DM. 2017. The effects of roads on habitat
selection and movement patterns of the American badger subspecies Taxidea taxus
jacksoni in Ontario, Canada. Canadian Journal of Zoology [Internet]. [cited 2019
Oct 22]; 95(11):821-828. Available from: dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjz-2016-0286
The Facts: Wildlife vehicle collisions: a hard hit online. C2004-2019. Wildlife Collision
Prevention Program; [accessed 2019 Nov 30].
https://www.wildlifecollisions.ca/thefacts.htm
Traffic Data Program online. C2019. Province of British Columbia; [accessed 2019 Dec 1].
http://www.th.gov.bc.ca/trafficData/tradas/reports/AllYears/2018/10/DV03/DV03S
%20-%20Site%20Nelson%2031-004EW%20-%20NY%20on%2010-10-2018.pdf
When bears prepare for winter. C2018. National Park Service; [accessed 2020 Mar 19].
https://www.nps.gov/articles/bears-winter.htm

Page 16 of 17