Can wildlife vehicle collision be decreased by increasing the number of wildlife passages in Korea?

  • Published source details Choi T. & Park C.H. (2007) Can wildlife vehicle collision be decreased by increasing the number of wildlife passages in Korea? Proceedings of the 2007 International Conference on Ecology and Transportation, Center for Transportation and the Environment, North Carolina State University, Raleigh NC, USA, 392-400.


This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Install tunnels/culverts/underpass under roads

Action Link
Terrestrial Mammal Conservation
  1. Install tunnels/culverts/underpass under roads

    A study in 2004–2006 in an area of rice fields and scattered forest in Jeollanamdo province, South Korea (Choi & Park 2007) found that highway underpasses were used by a range of mammals, though road sections with higher underpass density did not have fewer wildlife-vehicle collisions. Eleven wild mammal species were recorded using underpasses. The most frequent were raccoon dog Nyctereutes procyonoides (865 images), brown rat Rattus norvegicus (455), leopard cat Prionailurus benalensis (253), striped field mouse Apodemus agrarius (229), Siberian weasel Mustela sibirica (166), Eurasian otter Lutra lutra (35) and water deer Hydropotes inermis (32). Ninety-three roadkill mammals of 12 species were recorded. The most frequent were rodents (24 casualties), leopard cat (17), Siberian weasel (13) and water deer (12). Most mammals used all underpass types frequently, except water deer, which rarely used small passages. Use of seven circular culverts (0.8–1.2 m diameter), two box culverts (2.5 m wide and high) and five human underpasses (2.0–4.3 m wide and high), selected from 31 underpasses along a 6.6-km section of four-lane highway, were monitored from September 2005–August 2006. One or two infrared-operated cameras were installed 1–2 m inside each underpass for an average of 239 days/underpass. Wildlife-vehicle collisions were recorded daily from September 2004–August 2006.

    (Summarised by: Rebecca K. Smith)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust