Wildlife tracking technology options and cost considerations

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.