Letter: Speed cuts a deer waste of money
Monday 12th April 2010, 6:19AM BST.
Letter: A report on April 1 said that councillors plan to spend more than £30,000 on reducing the speed limit from 60 to 50mph on the A4169 between Much Wenlock and Buildwas (I am assuming this was not a wind-up considering the date).
Apparently this move follows a number of accidents involving deer.
Hopefully the deer will now be delighted to risk being hit at only 50mph and not 60mph.
I am sure readers will agree that this, like for example the 60mph speed limit on the A442 Eastern Primary, is a waste of public funds since that speed limit is not adhered to, with probably 75 per cent of drivers overtaking and not at 62mph either.
I suggest councillors that if you have £30,000 to spend on roads that you fill in a few of the more potentially dangerous potholes.
Stuart Oliver
Broseley
Shropshire Star on Twitter
Keep updated with the latest breaking news and content on our Twitter feed.
Lifestyle
Interactive Dining Out map
Hundreds of reviews by the Shropshire Star and Express & Star's teams to help you decide where to eat.
Entertainment
All the film reviews
Before you plan a trip to the pictures, get our critics' verdicts on all the latest movie releases.
OUR NEW APP
Get the new Shropshire Star app
Download the Shropshire Star’s new app to your iPad or iPhone to get one week of access to our digital newspapers absolutely FREE.
shropshirestar.com
Popular sections
Useful links
Oh Deer………….
A couple of hundred quid to change the signs from 60 to 50.
So where has the rest gone?
Let me see, set up consulation committees to discuss this.
Expenses claimed for travelling to the meetings, food, drink etc.
Two years of discussion….. £30,000 easy isn’t it.
YOUR MONEY
Report abuse
I agree. I don’t understand what difference a 10mph reduction in the posted speed limit will achieve. I wouldn’t be surprised if the recommendation is based on a tenuous statistic, rather than proper analysis.
Report abuse
The speed limit addresses a number of dangers, not simply deer. Local residents negotiating the entrance to drives and lanes have encountered particular difficulty over the years with fast-moving traffic. The deer danger is being addressed with reflectors that deter the animals from crossing the road when headlights approach. Whilst the death or injury of deer is regretable, these measures are intended to avoid damage to motor vehicles and injury to their occupants when they collide with the beasts – not an uncommon occurence here.
Report abuse
Very interesting letter, i have to say, i am in agreement with this person, dangerous potholes should be a funding priority, whether the road is 70, 60 or 50, deer will still run out…..
Report abuse
Considering that the council themselves say that the average speed on that road is below 50MPH and the accident rate half of the average rate,, I can’t see why they need to change the speed limit anyway, the average speed will still be approximately the same and a deer hit at 50MPH will do just as much damage as one hit at 60MPH, not that I’ve EVER seen any deer on that road, alive or otherwise.
This is just another example of the council wasting taxpayer’s money on a low risk road, when potholes and other high risk roads would be better concentrated on.
Report abuse
I often wonder if the highways departments are reducing these limits as a means of justifying their own little jobs rather than sensible highways management. Look at the 30MPH limit through Leighton, totally un-necessary.
Report abuse
Reduced speed, reduced petrol bill, ahhhhh this is method in their madness.
Report abuse
I lived in Wenlock for over 15 years and I’ve seen deer on that road twice that I can remember and I’ve travelled it thousands of times, often late at night and in the early hours of the morning. Deer are not a problem on that road.
What *is* a problem is one or two residents that live in or around the already bypassed hamlet of Farley who want everyone to crawl past their houses at 30mph because they presumably didn’t realise when they bought a house next to a major 60mph A road that cars might, you know, travel at 60mph past their houses and council officers trying to justify their existence by imposing illogical and unnecessary speed limits that go against Department for Transport and Police guidelines.
Tens of thousands of motorists use that road every year and the majority of them believe that 50mph is a safe speed so why spend £30k of taxpayers money putting up signs to tell them to do something they are already doing?
Report abuse
wonkotstane said
“What *is* a problem is one or two residents that live in or around the already bypassed hamlet of Farley who want everyone to crawl past their houses at 30mph because they presumably didn’t realise when they bought a house next to a major 60mph”
Well sorry to let him know that is their right as is yours to moan about it. I live on a road that has been reduced to 50mph it use to be 60mph that has not been seen as unsafe it may have well have been safe 40-50 years ago . A drop in speed can only be carried out if signs are put up otherwise drivers will assume it is natinal speed limit or more .Also every year thousands upon thousand of motorists are caught speeding so self regulation is a little backward.
Report abuse
Reduce the posted speed limit. add speed cameras and hey presto we have a regular supply of income. The cost of 30,000 is not replacing the the signs, its to add the cameras. Come on people, its the nanny state at its best, what more would you expect. They can’t hike taxes as it would not go down well with voters, but speed cameras, yes, do we know the yearly income from one camera on a single road? Its a no brainer.
Report abuse
Andrew, you obviuosly don’t realise how road management works. Speed limits are (supposed to be), set by the measured mean speed of the road (formerly 85percentile speeds).
These are speeds that “road safety experts” have found to be the safest speeds and are measured using equipment that results in these speeds, which the majority of law abiding, sensible, safe drivers, feel is a safe speed for any stretch of road. Often the police are against these speed limit cuts that we are seeing and anyone who doesn’t feel that the police are the real traffic experts, really needs to think twice.
Report abuse
The Deer that stray and jump out along the dawley Road between Hilltop Garage and lawleyChurch are probably just as dangerous -i hit one that jumped the hedges there on Bonfire night last year – luckily slowing down to 30mph at the time.
It obviously was injured, but caused a total write off of the front of my car, luckily its head bounced the windscreen , otherwise my wife could have been kileed.
I heard of someone else that same week that totalled their 4×4 on the same stretch of road – this time at 50mph.
I would not like to repeat the experience – ever, time for signs along the above stretch of road – hopefully costing much less money?
Pat Judson.
Report abuse
But Pat, what signs would you like to see on that road (wellington to Lawley) 30MPH signs or “beware of wild animals”?
30MPH would be too low for that road and, even as you have pointed out, would still lead to a nasty accident.
Report abuse
One has to question the Value for Money that we are getting from the councils’ highways dept when you consider the money wasted on implicating schemes like this, which obviously won’t change much (the mean speed on the road is already below the 50MPH limit proposed). Can they really justify wasting £30,000 changing the speed limit of a road that only has a mean speed of 44-49MPH anyway and an accident rate of half the national average?
Report abuse
saving just one life on the roads is simply…priceless, go for it i say if you dont like it get the bus
Report abuse