OOS 25-5 - Cost-benefit analyses for wildlife mitigation measures along highways

This is an update and an expansion of a cost-benefit model for wildlife-vehicle collisions and associated mitigation measures along highways, that was originally calculated in 2007 US$ and published in 2009. The direct cost values (vehicle repair, human injuries, human fatalities) were updated for deer, elk, and moose, and expanded by including additional species: gray wolf (Canis lupus), grizzly bear (Ursus arctos), and free ranging or feral domesticated species including cattle, horse, and burro. The costs associated with collisions were also expanded by including passive use, or non-use values associated with the conservation value of selected wild animal species. The total costs (in 2020 US$) associated with a collision with deer, elk and moose were about 2-3 times (direct costs only) or about 3-4 times higher (direct costs and passive use values combined) compared to the values in 2007 US$. The passive use costs associated with threatened species (wolf, grizzly bear) were higher or much higher than the direct costs. The costs associated with mitigation measures (especially fences and wildlife crossing structures) were also updated and supplemented with new data. New cost-benefit analyses generated updated or entirely new threshold values for deer, elk, moose, and grizzly bear. If collisions with these large wild mammal species reach or surpass the threshold values, it is economically defensible to install the associated type and combination of mitigation measures, both based on direct use and passive use parameters and their associated values. The trend in increasing costs associated with vehicle repair costs, costs associated with human injuries and fatalities, and through including passive use values for wildlife is that we learn that the implementation of effective mitigation measures can be considered earlier and more readily than based on the cost-benefit model published in 2009.