Yes, they put up fences to funnel animals. There are indeed measures for how effective they are.
It sounds like you're bothered that this article for popular consumption isn't an entirely different piece about the same topic.
It sounds like you're bothered that this article for popular consumption isn't an entirely different piece about the same topic.
The article at least cites some research about how many injuries and deaths are caused by wildlife collisions, but it doesn't give any information about how much animal crossing infrastructure helps with that. The videos are cute, but not very informative. Aside from that, it's mostly just qualitative assessments from a few biologists and environmentalists.
Why should the kind of information I'm asking for be absent from an article for "popular consumption"? I'm not asking for a research paper. Would mainstream readers be turned off by sentences like "Tall fences keep wildlife off the roads and funnel them towards structures which allow them to cross safely," or "A large crossing like the one pictured above can provide safe crossing for animals along a 20 mile stretch of road," or "After a crossing is built, traffic collisions with wildlife usually decrease by 50% to 80% according to the ACME Research Group"?
Maybe the lack of substance to this article has something to do with why it fell off the front page so quickly.
> Collisions have dropped by roughly 90 percent.
No link to the source of this number though.