FoA DEER

FoA DEER / AUTO COLLISIONS Report

Animal Rights Group Twists Facts to Blame Hunters for Deer-Auto Accidents-

A national animal rights group is claiming that “hunting causes deer-auto collisions.” Facts from a state wildlife agency report counter the claim.

Friends of Animals (FoA), a national anti-hunting organization, says its research has shown that deer-auto collisions increase during the autumn months. It links the rise in the number of collisions to deer hunting season, but fails to mention the fact that it is breeding season for the deer.

The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) recently issued a statement cautioning motorists about increased deer-vehicle collisions during autumn months. However, the wildlife professionals note, “Fall is breeding season and this is the time of the year when deer are on the move. In addition, motorists spend more time driving after dark at this time of year, especially after clocks are changed to coincide with the end of Daylight Savings Time. As a result, two-thirds of all deer-vehicle collisions occur during these three months.”

The anti-hunters report, “most deer-auto accidents occur during the early morning and early evening hours, which coincide with peak hunting hours.” The DEC concurs that these are the times of day that the accidents tend to be most prevalent, but it attributes the increased number of accidents to the fact that “the dawn and dusk peaks in deer activity coincide with high commuter traffic volume.”

Friends of Animals concludes that “all hunting should be discontinued.” While the animal rights group is calling for a ban on hunting, Road Management and Engineering Journal says that expanding hunting seasons is one of several preventative measures being used to reduce collisions between autos and animals.

US Sportsmen's Alliance info@USSPORTSMEN.org

Below-Comment: Good researching/data - Little knowledge of Deer biology/activity - Questionable analysis - as expected, biased conclusions/recommendations (#1).

A Report
Including Data, Analysis, Conclusions & Recommendations

Presented to: Ms. Priscilla Feral, President, Friends of Animals
Prepared by: Bill Clark, International Program Director, FoA

PREFACE

This Deer / Auto Collisions report represents an initial inquiry conducted by Friends of Animals into the magnitude, characteristics and underlying causes for highway collisions between deer and automobiles. Although this first survey provides enough data to conduct a preliminary analysis yielding tentative conclusions and recommendations, it is clear that, given the magnitude of the phenomena, and the tragic cost in both animal and human life, further work needs to be done. There is urgent need for further study of the phenomena and, more importantly, the application of various policies and techniques aimed at reducing these collisions as much as possible.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Research conducted by Ms. Megan Metzelaar, Outreach Coordinator for Friends of Animals, has contributed significantly to the preparation of this report. Similarly, the participation of wildlife agencies in the following states, which responded to Friends of Animals inquiries, was also very important to the preparation of this report:

Alabama Maryland New York
Arkansas Massachusetts North Carolina
Arizona Michigan Ohio
Connecticut Minnesota Oregon
Delaware Missouri Pennsylvania
Georgia Montana South Carolina
Indiana Nevada South Dakota
Kansas New Hampshire Texas
Kentucky New Jersey Vermont
Maine New Mexico Virginia
Washington

Also, it is appropriate to acknowledge the participation of the following agencies and organizations for having offered professional opinion and ideas concerning techniques that can be employed to reduce the incidence of deer / auto collisions:

Fairfax County (Virginia) Government
Insurance Information Institute (http://www.iii.org/)
Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks
Ohio Department of Natural Resources

INTRODUCTION

There are about a half-million reported collisions between deer and automobiles in the United States every year. The deer are killed in nearly all of these accidents, and more than one hundred people die as well. Another 10,000 persons suffer injuries.

Insurance companies pay out about $1 billion in claims each year to cover these accidents. The figures all agree, deer/auto collisions are very expensive C in terms of suffering and in terms of money.

State wildlife agencies report that the number of deer in the country is increasing. State highway departments report that the number of motor vehicles on the country’s roads is also increasing. There should be little surprise that insurance companies also report a steady increase in the number of deer / auto collisions. And there is every indication that the situation will continue to worsen unless effective intervention is initiated.

Friends of Animals has conducted this study to investigate the nature of deer / auto collisions: why do they occur? when do they occur? what can be done to prevent them? For the most part, FoA has relied upon data supplied by participating state agencies, although observations and ideas have also been accepted from various other sources, such as the insurance industry and wildlife biologists.

It is the intention of this effort that better studies will follow. Many shortcomings in available data were discovered during research conducted for this report. Conflicting conclusions have yet to be resolved. Prejudiced opinions appear to influence various policies. Despite the enormous cost in suffering and money, there is no cohesive national perspective on deer / auto collisions.

It is also the intention of this effort to draw conclusions from the data available data. These conclusions lead to specific recommendations concerning what communities can do to reduce the tragic number of deer / auto collisions and thereby make the nation safer for both motorists and wildlife.

THE DATA

The most conspicuous aspect of data involving deer / auto collisions is that there are no generally-accepted systematic standards for compiling that data. There are nearly systems than there are states. Following are indications of the enormous statistical irregularity a researcher confronts when considering this subject:

-Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Missouri provides deer/auto collision statistics organized by month and by gender.

- Maryland collects deer/auto collision statistics by gender, but not by month.

- South Carolina collects deer/auto collision statistics by the year, but not by gender nor by month.

- Arizona, Montana, New Hampshire and Ohio maintain deer/auto collision statistics organized by month, but not by gender. Massachusetts also reports deer/auto collisions by the month, but not gender, but warns the commonwealth does not have a mandatory reporting requirement. New York collects deer/auto collision statistics by the month, but not gender, and advises its statistics reflect only those who report the collision in order to obtain permission to "possess" the deer’s carcass (to use as meat).

- North Carolina collects animal/auto collision statistics that are not species specific, but estimates about 90 percent of the collisions reported involve deer.

- Georgia statistics are administered by the Farm Bureau Insurance Company which correlates annual deer collision insurance claims by county with the number of insured vehicles in each country.

- Indiana publishes deer/auto collision data by year and by county.

- Kansas publishes analyses that reflect: *"Average Deer Rated Vehicle Accidents per Billion Miles of Travel per Month in Kansas"
"Ten Year Total Deer Related Vehicle Accidents in Kansas"
"Number of Deer Related Vehicle Accidents in Five Minute Intervals Around Sunrise and Sunset"
"Apparent Effects of Speed Limits on Deer Related Vehicle Accidents in KS"

- Kentucky organizes its collision statistics by year, but observers there is a peak during the autumn

- Maine’s statistics reflect annual numbers compiled by counting carcass tags issued to motorists by the Warden Service and state, county and local police agencies.

- Nevada has just started to collect deer/auto collision statistics, and has no substantive database yet.

- Virginia requires deer/auto collisions to be reported, but to any of a variety of state and local agencies, and there is on office that collects them together. The Virginia Department of Transportation keeps annual statistics according to the type of road the deer are killed on.

- New Jersey deer/auto collision data is collected by municipality, but these are not collated by the state.

No deer/auto collision statistics are kept by state authorities in:

Alabama, Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas and Washington.

Despite the lack of consistency in compiling records, there nevertheless is enough information available to conduct an initial study, with some analysis, conclusions and preliminary recommendations. However, future inquiries in this direction would benefit very much from the establishment of a nation-wide, format-oriented system for collecting deer/auto
collision data.

SEASONALITY

Twelve states report deer/auto collisions by the month, and they were unanimous in reporting statistical peaks in autumn and early winter.

Connecticut reports 3,098 deer killed during 2000. Of these, 1,495 deer (48.26 percent) were killed during the three month period of October to December while the remaining 1,603 deer (51.74 percent) were killed during the nine month period of January to September.

Delaware reports 231 deer killed by vehicles during 2000. Of these, 179 deer (77.49 percent) were killed during the three month period of October through December, while the remaining fatalities of 52 deer (22.52 percent) were killed during the nine months of January to September.

Massachusetts reports 235 deer killed by vehicles during 2001. Of these, 99 deer (42.13 percent) were killed during the three month period of October through December, and 136 deer (57.87 percent) were killed during the nine months of January to September.

Missouri reports 8,112 deer killed by vehicles during 2001. Of these, 4,340 deer (53.5 percent) were killed during the three months of October through December, while the remaining fatalities of 3,772 deer (46.5 percent) were spread across the nine months of January to September.

In Montana, averaged statistics for the period 1998 - 2001 (inclusive) report an average of 6,452 deer carcasses removed by maintenance personnel each year. Of these 2,584 carcasses (40.05 percent) were removed during the three months of October through December, while the balance of 3,868 carcasses (59.95 percent) were spread across the nine months of January to September.

New Hampshire reported 1,365 deer killed by autos in 2001. Of these, 610 deer (44.69 percent) were killed during the period of October to December, while the remaining 755 deer (55.31 percent) were killed over the nine months of January to September.

New York reported 8,570 deer killed in 2001 by autos. Of these, 5,515 deer (64.35 percent) were killed during the three month period of October to December while the balance of 3,055 deer (35.65 percent) were spread across the nine months of January to September.

North Carolina reports 13,419 deer killed by autos during 2000. Of these, 6,996 deer (52.14 percent) were killed during the three months between October and December, with the remaining 6,423 deer (47.86 percent) killed over nine months between January and September.

Kansas reports an annual average of 3,261 deer killed per billion miles of travel during 1990 - 1999. Of these, 1,425 deer (43.70 percent) were killed during the three months between October and December, and the remaining 1,836 deer (56.3 percent) were killed over nine months between January and September.

Arizona reports 39.38 percent of its annual deer/auto collisions occur during the three months of October through December, with the remaining 60.62 percent occurring during the nine months of January through September.

Michigan reports 46.6 percent of its annual deer/auto collisions occur during the three months of October through December, with the remainder of 53.4 percent spread across the other nine months of the year.

Ohio reports 47.60 percent of its annual deer/auto collisions occur during the three months of October through December, with the remaining 52.40 percent spread across the remaining nine months of the year.

Kentucky does not organize its deer/auto collision data by month, however the commonwealth’s Forest Systems Program Coordinator observes "deer collisions are most abundant during October and November."

Similarly, Pennsylvania’s Erie Insurance Company reports nearly 50 percent of all deer/auto collision insurance claims during the three month period of October, November and December.

Data received from Arkansas reflected only the first five months of 2002, and thus is not of comparative value, and therefore was excluded.

GENDER:

Three states report deer/auto collision fatalities by month and by gender of the deer. One additional state reports annually with gender data. The following table itemizes this information. Kindly note that for each state, the number of males and females together is less than the "total" for that state because in each case there are a number of deer of "unknown" sex that were not calculated into the table.

State Total M/F Oct-Dec M/F Jan-Sep

CT 3,098 373 / 537 255 / 626

DE 231 100 / 75 15 / 34

MO 8,112 2,155 /1,969 1,173 / 2,297

Totals 11,441 2,628 /2,581 1,443 / 2,957

Maryland provides data for the year 2001 as a total of 405 "antlered" and 559 "antlerless" deer without stating gender (some of the antlerless deer may have been males after having shed their antlers.)

HOUR OF THE DAY:

There is statistical evidence indicating that most deer/auto collisions occur during the hours of early morning and early evening. The Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks made a detailed study of many thousands of such collisions the 10 year period of 1990 - 1999 (inclusive), and determined "the highest number of accidents typically happen 30 minutes before sunrise and 30 minutes after sunset."

Other organizations make similar observations.

C The Fairfax (Virginia) County Government advises, "Most deer related collisions occur at dusk and dawn."

C The Ohio Department of Natural Resources advise that most collisions occur "at dawn and after sunset."

C The Insurance Information Institute advises extra vigilance "in early morning and evening hours."

C The Erie (Pennsylvania) Insurance Group reports "about 80 percent of all deer-related crashes occur on two-lane roads between dusk and dawn."

No indications were found during the research for this report that contradict the data and anecdotal claims that the large majority of deer/auto collisions occur at dawn and in early evening.

ANALYSIS

SEASONALITY

Of the twelve states to provide deer/auto collision data by month, nine provided discrete numbers that can be analyzed. The following chart tabulates by state total deer fatalities per year, and then provides two column indicating what portion of those fatalities occurred during the three month period of October, November and December, and what portion of those fatalities occurred during the remaining nine months of January through September.

State Total Oct-Dec Jan-Sep

CT 3,098 1,495 1,603
DE 231 179 52
MA 235 99 136
MO 8,112 4,340 3,772
MT 6,452 2,584 3,868
NH 1,365 610 755
NY 8,570 5,515 3,055
NC 13,419 6,996 6,423
KS 3,261 1,425 1,836
Totals 44,743 23,243 21,500

These figure indicate that for the reporting states, slightly more than half (51.95 percent) of all fatalities occurred during the three month peak season, while slightly less than half (48.05 percent) occurred during the nine month remainder of the year. Thus, the accident and fatality rate in deer/auto collisions is approximately triple during October, November and December.

Three other states sent percentage information without discrete numbers of fatalities. Nevertheless, those percentages generally agree with those derived from the discrete numbers itemized above.

There is no contradiction in any state to the general observation that substantially higher collision and fatality rates occur during October, November and December.

GENDER:

Regrettably, only three states provided auto/deer collision fatality data that correlate gender and month. Nevertheless, there is some data to analyze and reporting states provide information concerning 9,609 deer of known gender killed in auto collisions during a known months:

The yearly ratio is 4,071 males ( 42.37% ) and 5,538 females (57.63% )

The Oct-Dec ratio is 2,628 males ( 50.45% ) and 2,581 females (49.55% )

The Jan-Sep ratio is 1,443 males ( 32.8% ) and 2,957 females (67.20%)

HOUR OF THE DAY:

There appears to be general consensus among state agencies, insurance companies and other organizations that the great majority of deer/auto collisions occur either at dawn or shortly after sunset. There is no evidence or claims that contradict this.

DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS

DATA COLLECTION & REPORTING:

Given the known costs of deer /auto collisions --
- about 500,000 collisions and an equal number of deer dead
- about 100 human fatalities
- about 10,000 human injuries
- about $1 billion in insurance claims paid

It is very difficult to understand why a phenomenon of this magnitude has not attracted a rigorous standard for data collection and reporting.

Some states (such as Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas and Missouri) make good efforts to collect some data. Regrettably, none of this data is in a compatible format that facilitates analysis and correlations.

Some states (such as Alabama, Minnesota, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas and Washington) don’t collect any data on deer/auto collisions C despite the very considerable costs in suffering and financial loss incurred by their citizens. This is perplexing.

As a minimum, states that establish deer hunting seasons should, theoretically, know the magnitude of the various significant non-hunting mortality absorbed by their deer populations C including significant mortality (a U.S. average of about 10,000 per state) due to collisions with automobiles.

It is possible to speculate on the reasons why data collection is so disorganized and incompatible, but further research on this fundamental concern needs to be conducted before any meaningful conclusions can be drawn.

SEASONALITY:

Persuasive evidence exists indicating that there is a three-fold increase in deer/auto collisions during the months of October, November and December.

Several states assert that this increase is caused by the deer’s annual rut, or breeding season. A sampling of states offer the following comments:

- Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, A... deer collisions are most abundant during October and November when deer movement increases due to breeding activities and dispersal of yearling males."

- Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks, " The months of October, November and December have the highest number of deer related accidents.

If we examine the timing of these accidents more closely we see a typical bell shaped or normal distribution of accidents mid November (Nov 17 is the 10-year average). That date is also the peak of breeding activity or rut."

- Fairfax (Virginia) County Government, in providing safe driving tips to help avoid colliding with deer, advises, "during rutting season (October through December), bucks move almost constantly in search of does."

- Ohio Department of Natural Resources: "Fall is the height of Ohio’s deer breeding season which means there will be a dramatic increase in deer movement. November is when the highest number of deer-vehicle collisions usually occur."

Thus, some states have identified positive correlations between increased deer/ auto collisions and the deer’s annual breeding season. No states have suggested that there may be any other factor causing the increase in collisions.

Another factor, however, has been identified by some members of the insurance industry. The Erie Insurance Group, Pennsylvania’s second largest insurer, has acknowledged the temporal coincidence between the deer’s rut and an increased collision rate. But it also observes, "Last year, Erie Insurance received an average of 34 deer claims a day. That number rose nearly five times on the first day of buck season and doe season for 157 and 160 deer losses, respectively."

There is suggestion that there may be a relationship between hunting and increased deer/auto collisions. But such suggestion has been fully ignored by state agencies responsible for wildlife management, and even those responsible for highway safety.

As the budgets of virtually all state wildlife agencies are tied to revenues received from the sale of hunting licenses, concessions and related transactions, it is possible that state wildlife agencies may be apprehensive of probing too deeply into any potential linking between increases in deer/auto collisions and the occurrence of hunting season.

Nevertheless, the presence of hunters in deer habitat very likely has an influence on deer behavior. As deer typically flee predators, there is a possibility that the presence of hunters provokes flight behavior in deer, which in turn results in an increase in incautious road crossings and consequent accidents.

Apologists for hunting have claimed there is need to "control" deer numbers as a method for reducing the incidence of deer/auto collisions on the nation’s highways. At face value, this claim may seem plausible C fewer deer should result in fewer accidents. On the other hand, a valid argument can also be made that hunters actually contribute to the increase in deer/auto collisions by serving as agents provocateurs who by their presence and predatory activities in deer habitat incite the deer to incautious evasive flight that results in collisions.

GENDER:

A male deer, or buck, normally is sexually stimulated for approximately 30 days during the autumn. During this time, his behavior is characterized by an unusual aggressiveness and movement. This is the season when the bucks challenge each other. It is a season when some dominant bucks withstand challenges and drive their adversaries to flight. It is a season when other dominant bucks are successfully challenged by new competitors and are themselves driven to flight.

It seems reasonable that during the rut, one should anticipate increased restlessness among the bucks. It is probable that their high testosterone levels make them less sedentary and less cautious, and that this could be a contributory factor to an increase in deer/vehicle collisions at this time of year.

However, the data indicates that there are a near equal number of females and males killed in collisions with autos during October, November and December, the average being 49.55 percent of collisions involving females, and 50.45 percent involving males.

During the rut, the does, or female deer, come into estrus for only 24 hours during any 30 day period. During this 24-hour period, one might assume biochemical changes in their metabolisms can influence behavior (although not as significantly as the testosterone-induced behavioral changes observed in the males). And there might be a residual influence of estrus in the females for a day or two subsequently.

But this does not explain the male-female parity in collisions with automobiles.

The influence of hormonal changes brought on by the rut upon the behavior of the female deer is significantly less than it is upon the behavior of the males. Furthermore, the bucks generally tend to ignore does that are not in estrus. Thus, only a very modest argument can posit that does become flighty and incautious because of hormonal changes or because of the aggressiveness of bucks. Such can happen for a few days, but not for a whole month.

Then why are there an almost equal number (less than one half of one percent difference) of does and bucks killed in collisions with autos during the breeding season?

Beside the influence of the rut, the only other significant change in the life of deer during autumn is the presence of hunters in their habitat.

In the absence of evidence to the contrary, a tentative conclusion must state that it is extremely likely that hunters contribute to the agitation and restlessness within a deer population C just as the presence of any other significant number of predators would. The deer quickly become aware that they are being hunted, and they respond accordingly, for the most part by either hiding or fleeing when the presence of a hunter is detected. Hiding likely does not contribute significantly to collisions with automobiles, but fleeing very likely does.

Through the rest of the year, it appears that more females than males are killed in collisions with automobiles. This may be a form of compensatory mortality that tends to help balance out the bias in favor of hunting males.

When one form of mortality is removed, compensatory or not, other forms of mortality inevitably are introduced. Concerning the deer, if social intervention reduces or eliminates hunting and/or auto collisions, there is prospect that more natural forms of mortality will regulate populations. This will be more beneficial to the deer and their habitats.

Another gender related concern involves the dispersal of yearling deer in the autumn. Some state wild agencies claim that increased accidents are due to the dispersal of yearling deer. Each autumn many yearlings naturally separate from their mothers and wander away from the areas where they were born. Some wildlife agencies suggest that these dispersing deer are more likely to wander across unfamiliar roads and contribute to the terrible statistics. But once again, the dispersing phenomenon affects young bucks, almost exclusively. It is very rare for a young doe to disperse from her natal habitat. The dispersal of yearling bucks does not explain why at an equal number of female deer are killed on the highways each autumn.

HOUR OF THE DAY:

Early morning and early evening are hours peak times of deer/auto collisions. Some authorities claim this is because these are also the hours of peak activity for the deer. Although this is true, it is also appropriate to keep in mind that most hunting is also conducted in close proximity to these hours, and there may be an influence C particularly the late afternoon hunting which may result in deer being stressed and incautious just as the sun sets and visibility is diminished.

No empirical data was found during the preparation of this report concerning any correlation between deer/auto collisions and day of the week. There are a few anecdotal indications that there are more collisions on weekends, and this needs to be investigated.

Weekends tend to be characterized by lighter "rush hour" traffic, but also by more hunting and more alcohol abuse.

SCAPEGOATS:

Hunting is becoming less acceptable. More and more people are insisting that hunting is biologically and ethically wrong. As a consequence, the number of hunters in America is in steady and serious decline. Indeed, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has recently reported a seven percent decline in the number of American hunters over the past five years. In 1996, there were 13,975,000 licensed hunters in the United States. Today, there are 13,034,000. Through the past half-decade, an encouraging 941,000 persons have given up hunting.

As some hunters abandon the practice, those who remain are increasingly pressed to justify their blood sport. It is no longer acceptable to call hunting a type of "recreation." So hunters are constrained to identify biological and social "benefits" that justify killing wild animals. Thus, they are "protecting" the deer from "over-population." They are helping to stamp out Lyme disease. They are helping to feed widows and orphans. They are protecting endangered woodland plants from over-browsing. And they have a dozen other excuses including, of course, protecting American drivers from collisions with the deer.

Generally, these apologias seem contrived, and the rationales supporting them are usually flawed.

Friends of Animals opposes hunting. All hunting. The more we study the excuses offered by hunters, the more we see they are baseless. Friends of Animals holds that hunting is ethically wrong -- it imposes capital punishment on innocent animals essentially for the amusement or "recreation" of someone who enjoys killing. Friends of Animals has determined that hunting is ecologically disruptive, and the specious "wildlife science" presented to justify hunting is mere pretext for biological mayhem. Friends of Animals considers hunting to be sociologically disreputable. Putative social benefits, from control of infectious disease to reduction of deer/auto collisions, are obnoxious shams that shamefully divert society’s search for real solutions to these serious problems.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Discontinue hunting. Data indicate a positive correlation between hunting and deer / auto collisions. Collisions increase dramatically during hunting season. occurs. And there are other correlations as well as observations by some insurance companies of a relationship between hunting and collisions. Although the present study has not been exhaustive enough to confirm the correlation as being conclusive, prudence would indicate that there is enough evidence to warrant precaution.

2. Initiate in-depth studies of the magnitude, characteristics and underlying causes of deer / auto collisions. Such studies should be subjected to full scientific rigor so they may provide the best possible information that can subsequently be used as a basis for policy and action.

3. Campaign for nation-wide standards for deer / auto collision reporting standards. A half-million accidents resulting in an equal number of dead deer, plus more than 100 human fatalities, and a cost of about $1 billion should be adequate motivation for the standardization of statistical reporting. Standardized statistics contribute meaningfully to analytical success, which in turn is essential for informed decision making. Informed decisions will contribute to a reduction in the frequency of deer / auto collisions.

4. Initiate campaigns to apply known, existing technology to ameliorate the number of deer / auto collisions. Technologies such as reflector lighting, fencing, over- and under-pass construction and related techniques need to be more widely used, particularly in areas with a history of high rates of deer / auto collisions. In many cases, the financial cost-effectiveness of such technologies alone can justify their implementation. Saving the price of tragedy is a cost that cannot be estimated.

5. Initiate a driver-education campaign to sensitize drivers concerning the specific hazards and recommended responses associated with deer / auto collision risks. Some of the points which should be included in such a campaign include:

A. Urge extra vigilance when driving at dawn, dusk and the first few hours of darkness, the hours when most collisions occur.

B. Ask drivers to be especially alert during mid- to late-fall, when the deer, probably because of hunting, tend to be panicky and incautious.

C. Encourage drivers to slow down when driving through deer habitat, such as wooded areas and fields. They should keep their eyes moving, glancing frequently into the habitat on both sides of the road, and anticipate having to brake. They should avoid focusing their eyes on the middle of the road.

D. Drivers should brake firmly when they notice a deer in or near their path. They should not swerve, as this can confuse the deer as to where to run. It can also cause the driver to lose control and hit a tree or another car.

E. Drivers should always wear a seat belt. Insurance professionals tell us that most persons injured in deer/ auto collisions were not wearing their seat belts.

F. If a driver sees one deer, it is extremely likely there are others around. Deer are social animals and rarely wander alone.

G. During appropriate hours, drivers should use the high beams on their headlights when there is no on-coming traffic. High beams will reflect light from the eyes of a deer on the road long before that part of the road is actually illuminated by the lights.

H. When a deer is seen on the road, the horn should be blown with a single long blast to frighten the animal off the road.

I. Drivers should keep their windshields clean. Dirty, pitted or fogged windshields reduce vision and increase the risk of collision.

J. At night time, deer usually are seen less than 200 feet from a vehicle. It takes a car about 317 feet to stop at 55 mph under optimum conditions. Slow down. A Kansas study has linked increased speed to increased deer/auto collisions.

K. Drivers should be reminded -- Don’t drink and drive. Even a little bit of alcohol reduces reflexes that you will need for handling the risk of a collision.

L. If a vehicle strikes a deer, the driver should avoid touching the animal. If the deer is alive, it will certainly be frightened and, in attempting to move could either hurt the driver or cause itself further pain and suffering. Get your car off the road, if possible, and call the police.

REFERENCES

PUBLISHED DOCUMENTS:

Erie (Pennsylvania) Insurance Group press release "Car-Deer Collisions Carry High Price Tag" 21 October 1998

Georgia - "Deer/Vehicle Collisions in Georgia" Annual Performance Report, Statewide Wildlife Investigations, Grant W-55

Indiana - Walker, Zachary J. "1999 Deer-Vehicle Accident Analysis" Indiana Division of Fish & Wildlife

Insurance Information Institute "Avoiding Deer / Car Collisions" Internet website (www.iii.org)

Ohio - "Use Caution This Autumn: Watch for Deer on Ohio Roadways" press release dated 18 October 2001 issued by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the Ohio State Highway Patrol and the Ohio Insurance Institute.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service "2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated Recreation, National Overview C Preliminary Findings" May 2002.

Virginia - "Deer-Vehicle Collision Abatement Project" Fairfax County, Virginia, website (www.co.fairfax.va.us/ps/police/deer.htm)

CORRESPONDENCE:

Alabama - DCNR e-mail message of 23 April 2002 from Keith Guyse, Assistant Chief, Wildlife Section

Connecticut - Department of Environmental Protection letter of 28 March 2002 from Dale W. May, Director DEP Wildlife Division. With appended tables listing road kill data.

Delaware - Department of Natural Resources & Environmental Control, fax of 2 May 2002 from Ken Reynolds, with six pages of deer / auto collisions statistics by month, gender and county.

Georgia - Department of Natural Resources letter of 23 April 2002 from Nick Nicholson, Senior Wildlife Biologist

Kansas - Department of Wildlife & Parks letter of 30 April 2002 from Lloyd Fox, Big Game Program Coordinator. With attached charts that are used in public presentations.

Kentucky - Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources letter of 29 April 2002 from Jonathan Day, Forest Systems Program Coordinator. With appended tables itemizing annual deer-vehicle collisions, and information concerning hunting season dates.

Maine - Department of Inland Fisheries & Wildlife undated fax message from Gerald R. Lavigne, Wildlife Biologist, with table of deer / auto collision totals by year.

Massachusetts - Division of Fisheries & Wildlife letter of 29 April 2002 from William Woytek, Deer Project Leader. With table itemizing monthly deerauto collisions and Deer Hunting Regulations attachment.

Minnesota - Department of Natural Resources letter of 1 May 2002 from Timothy P. Bremicker

Missouri - Department of Conservation letter of 3 May 2002 from Lonnie Hansen, Ph.D. With appended tables listing 2001 deer-vehicle accident statistics by month.

Montana - Department of Transportation, letter of 24 April 2002 from Pierre A. Jomini, P.E., Safety Management Engineer. With appended tables itemizing deer carcass removal by maintenance personnel, by month.

Nevada - Department of Transportation e-mail message of 25 April 2002 from Ed Wilson.

New Hampshire - Fish & Game Department, e-mail message of 29 April 2002 from Kent A. Gustafson, Deer Project Leader, with table indicating deer-auto collisions by month.

New Mexico - Fish and Game e-mail message of 6 May 2002 from Kerry Mower

New York - Department of Environmental Conservation e-mail message of 24 April 2002 from Kelly Stang. With table indicating deer-auto collisions by month.

North Carolina - Wildlife Resources Commission e-mail message of 29 April 2002 from V Evin Stanford, Deer Biologist, with table indicating deer-auto collisions by month.

Ohio - Department of Natural Resources letter of 29 April, 2002 from Michael C. Reynolds, Forest Wildlife Research Biologist. With attached table listing the monthly distribution of deer vehicle accidents as a percentage of the total.

Oregon - Department of Fish and Wildlife e-mail message of 24 April 2002 from Larry Cooper, Staff Biologist

South Carolina - Department of Natural Resources e-mail message of 24 April 2002 from Charles Ruth, wildlife biologist, deer project supervisor.

South Dakota - Game, Fish & Parks, Division of Wildlife e-mail message of 23 April 2002 from John Forney, Information Specialist

Texas - Parks and Wildlife letter of 17 May 2002 from Bryan Richards, Technical Program Coordinator, Wildlife.

Vermont - Fish & Wildlife e-mail message of 25 April 2002 from Charlee Drury, Program Services Clerk

Virginia - Department of Game and Inland Fisheries e-mail message of 1 May 2002 from Julia Dixon Smith, Media Relations Coordinator

Washington - Department of Fish & Wildlife e-mail message of 3 May 2002 from Holly Calkins, Customer Service Specialist, Wildlife Program.