Camera-trapping version 3.0: current constraints and future priorities for development
Paul Glover-Kapfer, Carolina A. Soto-Navarro, Oliver R. Wearn · Remote Sensing in Ecology and Conservation · 2019
Glover-Kapfer, Soto-Navarro, and Wearn surveyed the state of camera-trap technology and practice, identifying the constraints that limit the method and the innovations needed to overcome them. They reviewed hardware limitations such as trigger speed, detection-zone variability, battery life, and data-transfer bottlenecks, alongside analytical and data-management challenges. Looking forward, they outlined priorities including networked and real-time cameras, improved sensors, automated identification, and standardized data infrastructure that would enable large-scale, near-continuous monitoring. The paper framed an agenda for the next generation of camera trapping. As a forward-looking review connecting technology, analysis, and conservation needs, it is widely cited in discussions of where the field is heading and what developments would most improve wildlife monitoring.
Category:camera-trap-methods
Related articles
- Wildlife Insights: a platform to maximize the potential of camera trap and passive sensor datacamera-trap-methods
- Spatially explicit maximum likelihood methods for capture-recapture studiescamera-trap-methods
- Wildlife camera trapping: a review and recommendations for linking surveys to ecological processescamera-trap-methods
- A review of camera trapping for conservation behaviour researchcamera-trap-methods
- Spatially explicit models for inference about density in unmarked or partially marked populationscamera-trap-methods
- Random versus game trail-based camera trap placement for monitoring terrestrial mammal communitiescamera-trap-methods
AI-curated summaries for the pride’s library — verify citations independently before citing.