If the vehicle runs normally, that is, there is no overspeed, drunken driving or other illegal driving behaviors, then the livestock colliding on these roads are not responsible. In theory, the owner of these livestock should bear the compensation for vehicle losses, and also bear the compensation liability if there are casualties in the vehicle.
 This is a precedent, but it is still aimed at the case that the road grain drying caused the vehicle to lose control. The grain drying man caused the vehicle to lose control and caused casualties, and was ultimately judged to bear the liability for compensation and criminal responsibility at the same time; In the same way, if livestock enter the road subjectively and cause the same consequences, livestock keepers should also bear corresponding responsibilities, because they violate the same management regulations.
 On the contrary, if the vehicle has overspeed and other driving behaviors, the responsibility may be differentiated according to the on-site judgment results; If the main cause of the collision is driving behavior, it may be the full responsibility or main responsibility and compensation for livestock. This is like a few sheep at the edge of the two-way eight lane road. Normal driving will not hit. Since there is a problem when you hit it, there must be a problem.
 Secondly, if the driving behavior is improper, the road conditions are limited, and there are objective factors that lead to collision among livestock, the result may be that both parties bear a certain proportion of responsibility; The vehicle damage may be borne by the driver or the livestock keeper, and the livestock loss may be borne by the driver or the livestock keeper. These are uncertain factors, which need to be analyzed according to the actual situation on site. However, it is very unlikely that livestock herders will have no responsibility at all.
 Collision with an ownerless animal is an accident. In this case, neither the animal nor the road can be required to compensate. Ultimately, the vehicle can only bear the responsibility. However, as long as the vehicle has car damage insurance, this situation will also be covered by car damage insurance; If it causes casualties to its unilateral personnel, it can only be compensated by seat insurance. Both compulsory traffic insurance and third-party liability insurance are used to compensate third parties. There is no third party for such accidents against wildlife.
 Secondly, it needs to be noted that if the animals hit are not protected animals but ordinary livestock, and they are also ownerless animals; These animals cannot be taken away, and the dead livestock should be destroyed according to the regulations, because these animals are not quarantined.
 [Legal Basis]
 In Article 1250 of the Civil Code of the People's Republic of China, if an animal causes damage to another person due to the fault of a third person, the infringed person may claim compensation from the animal keeper or manager, or from a third person. After making compensation, the animal keeper or manager shall have the right to claim compensation from a third person.