Can you please explain to readers and drivers why the U.S. Highway 550/160 “Day-Night 60 mph-55 mph, September–May” signs were removed or ever put up to begin with? Is this another example of CDOT wasting taxpayer money like the Bridge to Nowhere? Thanks, Night & Day
It’s easy to blame the Colorado Department of Transportation for every instance of highway hijinks. But you are headed down the wrong road on this one.
Those day-night speed-reduction signs were a product of an even bigger waster of taxpayer money.
It came from the Colorado Legislature. ... Hmmm, that sounds like the title of a cheesy horror flick.
Anyway, back in 2010, a couple of lawmakers wanted to do something about roadkill.
In keeping with the cinematic theme, you could call it “Close Encounters of the Thud Kind.”
Wildlife was getting creamed, as were vehicles.
Sponsors of the legislation noted that collisions with critters were the No. 1 cause of accidents along U.S. Highway 160 between Pagosa Springs and Durango.
In northwestern Colorado, animal-vehicle collisions had risen 35 percent in one year.
So, a plan to slow down traffic was put on the fast track.
Supporters said that lower speeds would increase driver reaction time for those deer-in-the-headlights moments.
The legislation called for CDOT to establish 100 miles of “wildlife crossing zones” across the state. Speed limits were lowered, and fines were doubled.
Since most collisions happen at night in winter, the rules were in effect from Sept. 1 and May 1 and between the hours of 5 p.m. and 7 a.m.
Signs went up. Remember those signs? You saw them, right?
And that’s the problem. Everyone saw the signs, but few actually obeyed them.
“People didn’t slow down,” lamented our good friend at CDOT, spokeswoman Nancy Shanks. “Instead, they sped up.”
Not only that, though, the “number of hits” were up in some sections but down in others.
As originally written, the “Roadkill Bill” mandated a two-year period to see if wildlife-crossing zones worked. The law was extended in 2013 for another year.
“We wanted to have lots and lots of data,” Nancy said.
When it comes to wildlife/vehicle collisions, you want to crunch the numbers, so to speak.
After three years, “the final results are inconclusive,” she said. “We determined the program wasn’t working, and it wasn’t making a difference.”
The legislation for wildlife crossing zones expired, and so the signs were taken down.
Well, not exactly. Action Line took a short drive to check out the day-night speed limit sign just past the Iron Horse Inn, north of town.
The sign was turned around, so it faces away from traffic, which prompted one local wag to guffaw: “perhaps they will turn the signs back to punish us.”
Regardless, the day-night speed limit is no longer in effect. Your personal safety and the welfare of wildlife are in your hands.
So, slow the heck down if you are fond of fauna and fender.
Just because you can go 60 mph on a dark night in December, doesn’t mean you should.
And since the crossing zone for wildlife experiment didn’t work, it makes us wonder about the $1.2 million “wildlife detected” warning system between Bayfield and Durango.
It was installed in 2008. Six years of data should be sufficient. After all, it took only half that time to see that “wildlife-crossing zones” didn’t work.
Has roadkill decreased on U.S. Highway 160? Is the byway safer?
And most importantly, has anyone seen a correlation between spastic flashing lights and animals actually being on the road?
Email questions to actionline@durangoherald.com or mail them to Action Line, The Durango Herald, 1275 Main Ave., Durango, CO 81301. You can request anonymity if you think an “Idiots Detected” warning system would improve highway safety. (The trouble is, it would be on all the time.)
