Wildlife tracking technology options and cost considerations

Abstract

Context. Continued demand for long-distance remote wildlife tracking has resulted in the development of a variety of satellite tracking technologies. Choosing an appropriate satellite tracking system for a project involves financial, technical and operational tradeoffs associated with different systems.Aim. The aim of the present research was to assess the technology options and associated costs to help wildlife researchers select the best tracking solution for their needs.Methods. A technology-choice decision guide was developed to assist wildlife scientists select an optimal tracking technology. We undertook four satellite tracking case studies involving avian, aquatic and terrestrial species living in diverse environments around the world and use these case studies to validate and test the technology-choice decision guide and to calculate the cost effectiveness of alternative tracking methods. Technologies used in marine tracking were out of the scope of the present paper.Key results. Choosing the tracking method best suited for a project requires (1) clearly specifying the data required to meet project objectives, (2) understanding the constraints imposed by the study species and its environment, and (3) calculating the net cost per datum of the various tracking methods available.Key conclusions. We suggest that, in most circumstances, global positioning system (GPS) tracking is preferable to other options. However, where weight and environmental limitations prevent the use of GPS, alternatives such as Argos satellite Doppler-based positions (Argos) or very high frequency (VHF) can function adequately.Implications. The present paper provides simplified criteria for selecting the best wildlife satellite tracking technology for different situations.

Wildlife research and management methods in the 21st century: Where do unmanned aircraft fit in?

“…Conventional methods of tracking or relocating the animals and retrieving data from their loggers range from the use of satellites, aircraft, automobiles, and mobile phone networks to telemetry tracking on foot or physically recapturing subjects (Thomas et al 2011). It is not surprising, then, that the emergence of small autonomously piloted unmanned aircraft has spawned interest in the idea of automated wildlife telemetry tracking by UAS.…”

“…Notable examples include aircraft (Fleming and Tracey 2008), remote sensing satellites (Kerr and Ostrovsky 2003), radar (Larkin 2005), thermal cameras (O'Neil et al 2005), motion-triggered camera traps (O'Connell et al 2011), projectile-based animal capturing devices and chemical immobilization agents (Roffe et al 2005;Schemnitz 2005), and a wide array of animal-borne electronic tracking and logging devices (Thomas et al 2011).…”

Attachment and performance of Argos satellite tracking devices fitted to black cockatoos (Calyptorhynchus spp.)

“…They are light, enable location fixes to be downloaded via satellite and do not require birds to be recaptured or researchers to get close to the bird to obtain data. Although the accuracy of fixes is of lower quality than from GPS tracking devices (Thomas et al 2011), given the scale at which the cockatoos were thought to move, we expected Argos would provide usable information on the survival and movements of the study birds after release. As knowledge grows of the movement patterns of the birds, other options may be applicable.…”

“…There are a range of choices in regard to both attachment methods and types of tracking devices available (Thomas et al 2011). The ideal attachment method should cause no adverse impacts on survival or behaviour, should not cause excessive feather wear and should remain attached to the bird for the length of the study but eventually detach without further intervention (Giroux et al 1990).…”

Development of a tag-attachment method to enable capture of fine- and landscape-scale movement in black-cockatoos

“…However, although these studies were well suited to landscape-scale characterisation of species movement, they were limited by both battery life and data resolution. Depending on its programming schedule, a typical satellite tag can provide several usable position fixes a day (Thomas et al 2011). In contrast, GPS units allow collection of much larger volumes of data with resultant higher accuracy and precision, and can provide information regarding individual position and behaviour.…”