Doug Dahl addresses how you should react to animals in or near the roadway
Doug Dahl
The Wise Drive
Q: If you spend much time driving in rural areas you will encounter animals on the road. How should you react to animals in or near the roadway?
A: Here’s a trivia question: What animal kills the most humans in the US? If you answered shark or bear, you’re not even close. It’s other humans. I know, that’s a trick question. If we take ourselves out of the equation though, it’s deer. One researcher estimated that deer are responsible for 440 of the 458 annual deaths caused by animals. No, they’re not ferocious; they don’t mix well with traffic.
Of course, there’s no law preventing deer from walking onto the roadway, so this one’s up to us. And we don’t have a law that says it’s illegal to hit a deer, at least not a traffic law. I don’t know much about wildlife laws, but if you intentionally hit a deer with your truck, is that considered hunting? If so, I suppose you’d need to do it in season. But I’m getting off track.
If you can avoid a crash with an animal by either swerving or braking, choose braking. You’re more likely to maintain control of a vehicle while braking in a straight line, compared to swerving. But sometimes braking alone isn’t enough. At 40 mph on a dry road, the stopping distance is about 120 feet. If a coyote darts out 80 feet in front of you, physics says you can’t stop in time.
So what do you do? In an advanced driving course I took, the instructor taught us never to swerve for an animal that’s lower than your hood. If that sounds callous, understand that running into that coyote might dent your car, and will hurt the coyote, but you’ll likely be fine (physically, at least. If you’re sad about the coyote remember that, according to cartoons, he’ll come back to life at any minute.) Drivers who swerve may lose control and crash, turning what might have been property (and animal) damage into a serious injury crash.
For animals taller than your hood, like deer and elk, there’s a real risk that the torso of the animal could come through the windshield and strike the occupants in the front seats. This has been demonstrated repeatedly in crash tests and, unfortunately, in real life. For large animals, swerving might be a necessary risk in an undesirable circumstance.
But let’s take this all a step back. It’s better to avoid the situation all together than minimize the consequences of it. We can’t control when an animal walks into a roadway, but smart driving practices can help if one does. Scan well ahead (something we should all be doing anyway), including along the sides of the roadway. If it’s dark, choose a speed that doesn’t outrun your headlights. (It’s slower than you think.) Observe your surroundings; does it look like the kind of place where wild animals want to hang out? Also, consider the time of day. Animals have peak times of activity. Deer, for example, are most active around dawn and dusk.
And then assume what I just wrote is insufficient, as animals can pop up anywhere, at any time. I once saw two deer grazing midday on a small patch of grass between the road and a movie theater in an urban center.
Despite no “don’t hit a deer” traffic laws, the law prohibits driving faster than is “reasonable and prudent” given the “actual and potential hazards.” If you think you’re in wildlife country, choose a speed that gives you the best chances to avoid a crash.
Also read:
- Opinion: The income tax proposal has arrived
Ryan Frost of the Washington Policy Center argues that a proposed Washington income tax creates a new revenue stream rather than delivering tax reform or relief. - Opinion: ‘If they want light rail, they should be the ones who pay for it’
Clark County Today Editor Ken Vance argues that supporters of light rail tied to the I-5 Bridge replacement should bear the local cost of operating and maintaining the system through a narrowly drawn sub-district. - POLL: If a sub-district is created, what area should it include?
Clark County residents are asked where a potential C-TRAN sub-district should be drawn if voters are asked to fund light rail operations and maintenance costs. - Opinion: IBR falsely blaming inflation
Joe Cortright argues that inflation explains only a small portion of the IBR project’s cost increases and that rising consultant and staff expenses are the primary drivers. - Letter: The Interstate Bridge Replacement Program’s $141 million bribe can be better spent on sandwich steel-concrete tubes
Bob Ortblad argues that an immersed tunnel using sandwich steel-concrete tubes would be a more cost-effective alternative to the current Interstate Bridge Replacement Program design.
