Road Ecologists Want You To Fall In Love With Infrastructure

The following is an excerpt from Crossings: How Road Ecology Is Shaping the Future of Our Planet by Ben Goldfarb.

When you purchase products through the Bookshop.org link on this page, Science Friday earns a small commission which helps support our journalism.

Buy The Book

Crossings: How Road Ecology Is Shaping the Future of Our Planet

Buy

My own introduction to road ecology came in 2013, the year I embarked on a trip across the continent to write about an extraordinary scheme called the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative. The goal of Yellowstone to Yukon, or Y2Y, is boggling: its advocates envision a network of connected habitats that would permit animals to wander unhindered along the spine of the Rockies, a region that spans five American states and four Canadian provinces and territories. Such a corridor would preserve migration routes for elk and caribou, permit far-​ranging creatures such as wolves to mingle and mate, and help sensitive animals like wolverines flee northward as climate change nips at their heels. The initiative’s emblem is the grizzly, whose expansive requirements make it a useful proxy for other forms of life. An ecosystem that can support bears is probably healthy enough for everyone else.

To the uninitiated, it sounded far-​fetched. Soon after Y2Y’s inception, The West Wing parodied it as the “Wolves Only Roadway,” the vanity project of humorless tree huggers who get laughed out of the White House. But the show’s writers, like most of Y2Y’s critics, misunderstood the concept. Y2Y wasn’t a discrete pathway; it was a continental jigsaw riddled with missing pieces, most of them at the fragile margins where wildlands and settlements collided. The mission of Y2Y and its many partners was to plug those holes, to help bears and other animals safely navigate the Rockies without running afoul of humans. In British Columbia, I toured protected grainfields that grizzlies used to commute between mountain ranges at night. In Montana, I sniffed offal in an electric-​fenced paddock where ranchers were composting their dead cows rather than permitting them to fester in bear-​enticing boneyards. (Few travelers, human or ursine, can resist fast food.)

Yet Y2Y’s deepest cuts remained mostly unhealed. The region was riven by enough numbered roads to fill a sudoku puzzle: I-​90 and Highway 3 and Highway 20, routes 95 and 40 and 12 and 212, spiderwebbed otherwise wild lands. I drove highways that ended lives—​I lost track of how many elk littered the shoulder on Crowsnest Pass—​and others that cleaved grizzly populations into lonely clusters. Roads, I began to realize, were not merely a symptom of civilization but a distinct disease.

Among the roads within the Y2Y corridor’s ambit was U.S. 93, which traverses Montana on its 1,300-​mile jaunt from Arizona to the Canadian border. Like so many highways, U.S. 93 had been built heedlessly in the 1950s, plowing through wetlands, elk meadows, and a vast reservation belonging to the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes. When, in the 1990s, state and federal agencies sought to expand U.S. 93 from two lanes to four, tribal officials demanded the chance to provide input on the reconstruction. A wider, faster road might be safer for drivers, but it would also slaughter more deer, elk, bears, and other animals foundational to the tribes’ culture. “The road is a visitor,” the tribes insisted, that should “respond to and be respectful of the land and the Spirit of Place.”

The Salish and Kootenai flexed their legal and moral muscles, and, when U.S. 93 was finally reconstructed, engineers included around forty wildlife crossings—​a network of underpasses, tunnels, and culverts that allowed animals to slink beneath the highway unimpeded. Roadside fencing kept creatures off the highway and guided them toward the passages. The project’s flagship structure was an elegant bridge designed principally for that avatar of wildness, the grizzly bear. In aerial photos, the overpass looked at once futuristic and anachronistic, a green parabola that vaulted over the highway with Middle Earthish grace. If roads were a disease, wildlife crossings seemed like a treatment.

That October, I drove U.S. 93 in the company of Marcel Huijser, a lean, grizzled road ecologist who had begun studying the highway back when the crossings were still in their planning stages. I was then more or less ignorant of road ecology, let alone how one became a road ecologist, so, as we headed north from Missoula, I asked Huijser to tell me about his past. He’d grown up in the Netherlands, a country that packs one of the world’s densest road networks into a landmass one-​ninth the size of Montana. Bears and wolves had long since fled the overbuilt Dutch landscape, so Huijser had studied hedgehogs, which popped in and out of gardens like cheerful neighbors. “Everybody thinks they’re cute and wonderful,” Huijser said as we rolled past golden cottonwood galleries. “They’re a very sympathetic animal. People want to make things pleasant for hedgehogs.”

Alas, hedgehogs—​small, plodding, nocturnal—​were practically designed to be roadkill, and Huijser’s calculations suggested that hundreds of thousands were being crushed each year. This was a familiar story in the Netherlands. Roads, dikes, canals, and towns had broken the country’s landscape into pieces, leaving little space for hedgehogs and other fauna. In 1990 the country, with typical Dutch ingenuity, had launched a national defragmentation plan that ultimately led to the construction of more than eight hundred wildlife crossings on national highways, from badger pipes to deer bridges. Huijser’s research had shown that hedgehogs prefer the ecotones where forests and grasslands meet, helping planners situate new passages. “One of my statements during my PhD defense was that they’re really edgehogs,” he said, sheepish at the pun.

In 1998, Huijser met his wife, an American conservationist named Bethanie Walder, at—​what else?—a road conference. He eventually relocated to Montana to work for the Western Transportation Institute, the research team tasked with studying the U.S. 93 crossings. In the years that followed, Huijser and his colleagues scooped up deer pellets, pored over photos snapped by motion-​activated cameras, and crouched to inspect hoof- and pawprints deposited in sandy soil. By the time I visited, animal collisions had fallen by around three-​quarters, and Huijser’s team had documented tens of thousands of successful traversals through the crossings: coyotes, foxes, bobcats, elk, otters, porcupines, moose, grizzlies. Highway 93, Huijser told me, “compares favorably with anywhere else in the world in the number and density of structures”—​even the Netherlands.

As Huijser parked beside the overpass, dusk descended. He unlocked a gate in the roadside fence, and we slipped through as though into a portal, passing from the world of the highway to a wild parallel dimension. We climbed the gentle slope, autumn grass crispy beneath our boots. I reached the crossing’s apex and peered down at the muffled stream of Missoula-​bound traffic. The horizon glowed orange. The evening was sharp with oncoming winter. Though we were just three stories above the earth, I felt buoyant. The air shimmered with supernatural possibility; at any moment, I thought, a grizzly would emerge from the pines and trudge onto the bridge.

Huijser didn’t share my muted awe. He paced the crossing and pointed out design flaws. He was displeased with the bridge’s spartan landscaping: a few carefully positioned brush piles, he suspected, would aid mice and voles. And its sightlines were too exposed. His cameras had recently captured a black bear fleeing the headlights of an approaching car. “A visual screen would be helpful,” he said. Shrubbery or an earthen berm might do the trick. “It could just be a wooden fence.”

Huijser, it occurred to me, was attempting to inhabit other beings’ Umwelt, their subjective lived experience. Road ecology was an act of interspecies imagination, a field whose radical premise asserted that it was possible to perceive our built world through nonhuman eyes. How does a moose comprehend traffic? What sort of tunnel appeals to a mink? Why do grizzly bears prefer crossing over highways while black bears go under? These questions had empirical answers, but they also required ecologists to think like wild animals—​empathy manifested as science.

To us, roads are so mundane they’re practically invisible; to wildlife, they’re utterly alien. Other species perceive the world through senses we cannot fathom and experience stressors and enticements we hardly register. Bats are lured astray by streetlights, snails desiccate as they slog across deserts of asphalt, and seabirds crash-​land on the shiny tarmac they mistake for the ocean. Consider the sensory experience of, say, a fox approaching a highway: the eerie linear clearing that gashes the landscape, the acrid stench of tar and blood, the blinding lights staring from the faces of thundering predators. When Hazel, the rabbit protagonist of Watership Down, encounters his first road, he confuses it for a river, “black, smooth and straight between its banks.” A passing car “fill[s] the whole world with noise and fear.” “Now that I’ve learnt about it,” he adds, “I want to get away from it as soon as I can.”

Road ecology inverts our oldest joke about animals and transportation: Why did the chicken cross the road? Embedded in that chestnut is an assumption—​that the road is inviolable and eternal, as fixed in its course as a river. The road is a given; it’s the fowl whose actions demand explanation. But the riddle’s logic is backward. It’s the animals who have always moved, the road that’s the upstart. A better question might be, Why did the road cross the land?

This framing isn’t always comfortable. When we don’t ignore roads, we dismiss their toll as the inevitable cost of modernity. Other forms of human-​caused animal death are deliberate: we pull the trigger, set the trap, order the cheeseburger. But few among us ever flatten an animal on purpose. Like most people, I at once cherish animals and think nothing of piloting a three-​thousand-​pound death machine. The allure of the car is so strong that it has persuaded Americans to treat forty thousand human lives as expendable each year; what chance does wildlife have? One summer, in Alaska, I hit a feisty songbird called a yellow-​rumped warbler—​a death I didn’t discover until I found the delicate splash of feathers wedged in the grille the next day. I’d killed not with malice but with mobility. “We treat the attrition of lives on the road like the attrition of lives in war,” the writer Barry Lopez lamented. “Horrifying, unavoidable, justified.”

This is particularly true in the United States, home to the world’s longest road network, at four million miles. Our mid-​century automotive revolution spawned not only highways but also parking lots, driveways, suburbs, pipelines, gas stations, car washes, drive-​throughs, tire shops, and strip malls—​a totalizing ecosystem engineered for its dominant organism, the car. For all its grandeur, though, America’s highway network is relatively static. Although we spend almost $200 billion on our roads annually, most goes toward repair rather than new construction. Granted, American wildlands are hardly safe from ill-​conceived development: Florida, for one, has been scheming up new toll roads in panther habitat, and even routine highway maintenance projects have an uncanny knack for adding lanes and worsening traffic. Even so, our country’s asphalt limbs have mostly ceased to elongate, petrified into something like their eternal shape.

Instead, we’re exporting our autocentric lifestyle. More than twenty-​five million miles of new road lanes will be built worldwide by 2050, many through the world’s remaining intact habitats, a concrete wave that the ecologist William Laurance has described as an “infrastructure tsunami.” Astoundingly, as of 2016, three-​quarters of the infrastructure that will exist by the middle of this century had yet to be built. Although it’s easy to denounce the tsunami, I benefit from roads as much as anyone: I eat avocados trucked from California; I get pizza delivered to my doorstep; I rely on America’s marvel of a highway system to reach friends and hospitals and airports. (And I confess to feeling what one Volkswagen ad campaign called Fahrvergnügen, the pleasure of driving.) Roads pose the same queasy conundrum as climate change: having profited wildly from growth, can wealthy nations deny less-​developed countries the benefits of connectivity?

Road ecology offers one path through this thicket. North America and Europe constructed their road networks with little regard for how they would affect nature and even less comprehension of how to blunt those effects. Today, in theory, we know better. Road ecology has revealed the perils of reckless development and pointed us toward solutions. Over the last several decades, its practitioners have constructed bridges for bears, tunnels for turtles, rope webs that allow howler monkeys to swing over highways without descending to the forest floor. On Christmas Island, red crabs clamber over a steel span during their beachward migrations; in Kenya, elephants lumber beneath highways and railroads via passages as tall as two-​story houses. And road ecology has yielded more than crossings: we’ve also learned to map and protect the migrations of cryptic animals, to design roadsides that nourish bees and butterflies, and to deconstruct the derelict logging tracks that lace our forests—​proof that old mistakes need not be permanent.

Quoth the late-​night sage John Oliver, “Infrastructure isn’t sexy.” Clearly he hasn’t talked to a road ecologist. Roads have become one of conservation’s most urgent topics, the focus of hundreds of scientists operating in dozens of countries. Over several years I traveled the world meeting some of them: the biologists tracking anteaters across Brazilian highways, the conservationists building bridges for California’s mountain lions, the animal rehabbers caring for Tasmania’s car-​orphaned wallabies. While Crossings is rife with other species—​mule deer and capybaras, wombats and monarch butterflies—​it also considers how our own lives have been captured by pavement and how we can reclaim them. Wild animals, the naturalist Henry Beston wrote, are neither our brethren nor our underlings; instead, they are “other nations, caught with ourselves in the net of life and time.” And the road ensnares us both.

This book is about how we escape.

Excerpted from Crossings: How Road Ecology Is Shaping the Future of Our Planet. Copyright (c) 2023 by Ben Goldfarb. Used with the permission of the publisher, W.W. Norton & Company, Inc. All rights reserved.