An ISU animal ecology professor has proposed an idea for a new device that may prevent some deer-vehicle accidents, and it could be tested on Iowa roads as early as next fall.

Brent Danielson, associate professor of animal ecology, worked on a study about deer-vehicle accidents from May 1998 through April 1999. The Iowa Department of Transportation asked Danielson and Mike Hubbard, an ISU graduate student at the time, to look at what has been done to prevent deer-vehicle accidents and see what works.

There are some tested reflectors that cause vehicle headlights to flicker in the field and give deer the impression that a predator is there, but Danielson doesn’t think they will work.

“Rather than trying to stop deer from crossing, we would try to get them to cross at particular points by using gaps in fences,” Danielson said. “We would put detectors in these spots that would trigger a flashing light. Motorists would know that a deer was present. We can’t make deer cross at any old place, but we can narrow it down and then try to control those places.”

After his study was done, Danielson concluded that this combination of ecological practices and the motion sensors would be the best method to prevent accidents.

“We dreamed this up basically on our own. There are a number of people who have been interested in putting motion detectors along the road, but they are thinking of blanketing the whole roadway,” he said. “This would mean that motorists couldn’t tell exactly where the deer is. It would also take a lot of detectors.”

Danielson said a range of unanswered questions plagues this new technology.

“There are many possible problems that go along with these technological ideas,” he said. “If a deer gets up on the roadway and somehow doesn’t trigger the detector and somebody hits the deer, who is at fault? Is the state at fault because the device didn’t work?”

Danielson said too many false alarms may eventually make motorists ignore the flashing lights.

“If the devices were triggered every time a breeze blows a branch in front of it, drivers will cease to believe the flashing light,” Danielson said. “You don’t want to cry wolf, but you better cry wolf if there is one there.”

Reliability is still a problem in finding a useful device, Danielson said.

“We need something reliable yet cheap because it would have to be put in many places. I think we should make Iowa the test bed for this project, and see what works,” he said.

The estimated cost for this would be about $3 million.

“That is a huge amount of money for one research project,” said Steve Gent, research engineer for the Iowa Department of Transportation. “There is no way we would spend $3 million of the tax payers’ money for a single project.”

Gent said the biggest factor in implementing the devices would be how much money the federal government would be willing to put into it.

The Iowa DOT is planning to try a smaller version of the testing.

“We will probably have four to six test sites up and running by next fall,” Gent said. “Some of the sites will use the sensors, and others will try other methods such as the reflectors.”

There will be a couple of test sites in the Western states and a couple in the Midwestern states, including Iowa. The DOT plans to test them for about three years and then evaluate them. Gent said the DOT has committed to paying $75,000 during the next three years for these tests.

“We will put in $25,000 each year, which is a lot of money, but is quite a bit less than $3 million,” Gent said. “The real issue with deer accidents, though, is reducing the deer population.”

Terry Little, wildlife research supervisor from the Department of Natural Resources, said Iowa doesn’t have too many deer in terms of biology, but in a social context, there are more deer in specific areas than a few years ago. He said deer-vehicle accidents may be due to more drivers rather than an overpopulation of deer.

“Overall, two years ago we needed to reduce the number of deer,” Little said. “Now we are actually getting closer to where we need to be. It is hard because some people may say that there are way too many deer, at the same time others will complain that there aren’t enough.”

Little said DNR officials have received few complains about deer problems.

“People that are happy don’t call in and tell us,” he said. “They only call us when they are having problems. With few complaints right now, I am led to believe that things are OK.”