I respect the memorials ("like" doesn't seem to be the right word).

I think our society is too separated from death. The sick are taken to hospitals to die. Local grave yards have been replaced with massive necropolis cemetaries located far out of most people's daily lives.

In most other cultures, past and present, the living are well aware of the dead. Perhaps your parent or grandparent died in the house that you live. The local perish church which is passed daily, has a grave yard. In non-Christian societies, I am confident that there are other daily reminders of near relatives or friends who have died.

Drivers deal with ALOT of commercial distractions, Golden arches, etc. Unless we are prepared to haul down all the commercial advertising, there is little ground to stand on when insisting that a few humble flowers or a cross here or there needs to be removed. First, deal with the cellphones, the stereos, the advertising. If drivers are still too distracted, make it a criminal offence to place a few flowers on the shoulder.

I think the roadside memorials might serve as a warning to drivers that they are not immortal and that accidents have happened at a particular spot, and might happen again. I would think they would have the effect of making people slow down and be more cautious. I know they have that effect on me.
A couple of people at our local university have studied the roadside shrine phenomena and wrote something (I'm not sure if it is a book or a paper) called: I See Dead People: The Rise of the Roadside Shrine in Rural British Columbia.

There is blog here that talks about roadside memorials:
Roadside Memorials

It just occured to me that as I write this my son is driving to Edmonton. For some reason this topic suddenly seems creepy. Travelling Mercies for all travellers please.

I don't have a problem with them as long as they're not so eye-catching (for whatever reason) as to present a hazard to drivers. I wouldn't think that there'd be any responsibility on the public works people for upkeep unless there's some agreement with the organization that erected the memorial (e.g. MADD) to do so. I believe most of them are just there by the grace of the property owner.

I think they are distracting and morbid, especially when they decorate a gaudy Christmas tree and leave it there. Perhaps that's what graves are for. It's a weird individualism that society supports where we now pay homage to the place of death rather than to the person.

I don't have a problem with them at all. Among all the many distractions that exist on the highways, they are pretty minor.

Governments have a problem with them because they remind people that certain stretches of road are dangerous, which is very inconvenient to the people who could do something about that but won't.

Sometimes so many makes it hard to find mine.

Seems the cost of road side memorials is pretty minimal given the benefit they can provide. It brings benefits to those trying to connect with their loved ones. It is a difficult and elusive thing for many to try to grab, hold onto, and maintain connection with those you love when they die. Though I did not lose someone at a roadside, where my loved ones spent their last moments on earth alive has real significance to me. Where the shell of their bodies are now, less so.

It also brings benefits to the community at large, reminding them that driving is dangerous, that life is short, and more generally, by bringing death more out in the open. I particularly agree with earlier posters who pointed out that our culture likes to hide away death and mortality. I actually think it should be a more integral part of our life.

However, I did not always think this way. My feelings about death and grief changed dramatically after I experienced grief of losing two close family members. I look back and realized I managed to avoid a funeral for much of my life at that point! and while I had known people who died I didn't experience intense grief until the loss of my dad and brothre. Holy cow!

I really didn't think about death much before then. I also realized that until I had to really confront it, I was afraid to approach it and had just avoided it most of my life. I wonder if as a culture ew do that in general.

Grief changed me. Does it change all of us? I most definitely took on a new perspective in the world, and developed my spiritual side when I came to know death. 'm not afraid of it anymore. And I really don't mind the reminder that life is really short and can disappear in an instant. I developed a new ongoing respect for those who have died and their remaining loved ones.

I' am not aware of any specific legislation regarding these memorials, but these are the questions that I find concerning:

What about the possible effects on the environment?
Who should be in charge of the up-keep of the memorial?
Who should decide if a roadside memorial is deemed inappropriate and should be taken down due to lack of maintenance?

I agree with most of you on this topic, they are a great reminder to drive safe, but as Madmonk stated:

they are distracting and morbid,

Perhaps that's what graves are for. It's a weird individualism that society supports where we now pay homage to the place of death rather than to the person.

I have to agree with this statement and also add that the environment pays the ultimate price for these memorials. People eventually forget about them, they blow away in the wind, get buried under snow or get ingested by wildlife. Many of you have touched base on the personal aspect of the memorial but what about the environmental aspect?

I guess I don't see any environmental concerns. I drive past one daily (on a corner that I almost myself died on). Someone created an heart shaped flower bed and it has been well tended -- as I recall it was a husband and wife on a motorcycle trip. The spouse who died was ahead of the other and hit a car. The other spouse was the first on the scene (please pray for them).

If someone ceased to tend it, there would be no problem. If the squirrels weren't getting their petunias there, the would hop to the other side of the hill, where there are houses with petunias. Whether petunias or other flowers are a problem, the squirrels health is not affected by this one small garden. If people were constantly putting out the pin wheels one sees in cemeteries or plastic wrapped flowers, I could see a problem. But in my experience, I think people who lay flowers are mindful to not leave plastic. Again, I see no problem with cut flowers (unless wrapped in plastic or if it was a poison variety). If there is one, could someone explain it? Crosses or "monuments" (not usually monumental)? Either wood or metal. Surely they are not bigger problem than the tire tread, pop cans, etc. etc. that are littering our highways "a mari usque ad mare." If a cross blews away, I'm sure they are picked up by the same volunteers or court ordered community servers who pick up the real garbage.

As MD's across the country are constantly spraying the ditches along the roads to control weeds, gardeners are planting the same flowers in their flower beds and cigarette smokers are constantly exercising their apparently God given right to throw their butts everyone, if they are an environmental concern, roadside memorials are way, way, way down the list.

What's the bigger concern, the few flowers in the ditch, or the kilometres of tar roadways next to which they are laid and the millions of toxin spewing automobiles that speed past.

Lets think about the mountains before we protest the mole hills.

We have a few around, and I've often thought, wouldn't it be good if the city would put up a small (like a 5x7) brass plaque. Then if there was need for more than one, they might have an idea to actually adjust the road signs or something to reduce the danger. It would a permanent, tidy, respectful reminder.

The City of Edmonton puts up signs at the site of traffic fatalities. The symbol is a black coffin shape on white. Certainly, this satisfies as a warning to drivers that it might be a dangerous spot. Satisfying the family as a form of mourning? maybe yes, maybe no.

As Jeffrey says "The City Of Edmonton puts up coffin shaped signs"
The initial plan had been to place crosses at the sites but folks who weren't Christian objected. So a coffin was chosen as a more universal symbol of death.

I think roadside memorials are fine if someone finds comfort in them. They are not overly distracting to drivers.

coffin? that sounds creepy, more aimed at slowing people down (good) than comforting people

The coffin shape had a great deal to do with the mayor in Edmonton at the time. Jane Reimer was ultra-PC. So much so that when she became mayor, she refused to wear the chain of office because it had a beaver pelt on the back. Although I can understand someone having scuples about furs, without the fur trade their likely would NOT have been any Edmonton.

I agree, the coffins seem creepy. But what's the alternative. If a Moslem died in a car crash, I don't think a cross would be appropriate. I don't think the symbol should vary depending on the deceased's faith. The coffins are the worst, however there is no alternative that seems to make sense.

Jeffrey wrote "I agree, the coffins seem creepy. But what's the alternative."

Apparently a Buddhist symbol of death is the wheel which would be appropriate under the circumstances.

A broken column symbolizes a life cut short.

Or perhaps my favourite, the dove, which in many cultures, represents the spirit.

I had suggested just a simple plaque - what's wrong with no symbol??