Abstract
The availability of affordable 'recreational' camera traps has dramatically increased over the last decade. We present survey results which show that many conservation practitioners use cheaper 'recreational' units for research rather than more expensive 'professional' equipment. We present our perspective of using two popular models of 'recreational' camera trap for ecological field-based studies. The models used (for >2 years) presented us with a range of practical problems at all stages of their use including deployment, operation, and data management, which collectively crippled data collection and limited opportunities for quantification of key issues arising. Our experiences demonstrate that prospective users need to have a sufficient understanding of the limitations camera trap technology poses, dimensions we communicate here. While the merits of different camera traps will be study specific, the performance of more expensive 'professional' models may prove more cost-effective in the long-term when using camera traps for research.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 624-635 |
Number of pages | 12 |
Journal | Ambio |
Volume | 44 |
Issue number | 4 |
Early online date | 27 Oct 2015 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Nov 2015 |
Bibliographical note
Acknowledgements: The work was supported by the RCUK DigitalEconomy programme to the dot.rural Digital Economy Hub (EP/
G066051/1). SN and RJI were funded by the Scottish Government
Rural Environment Research and Advisory Directorate. We are grateful for access to private land where much of the field work took place. We thank Sandra Hamel, two anonymous referees, and Ambio’s editors for valuable comments on earlier versions of the paper.
Keywords
- camera trap
- digital innovation
- false negative
- false positive
- sensors
- trail camera