# Guidelines for Telemetry Studies on Snow Leopards
## 3 Design
General recommendations for suitable brands are not possible because the technology and devices develop constantly. Instead, a useful step is to consult potential vendors and researchers who have worked in similar conditions/with similar species. Performance of tracking devices of poorer quality may degrade over time, especially when deployed in field settings, for ethical reasons the best available tracking device should be selected. Vendors are often willing to work with researchers to build customized equipment if needed. Most studies suffer from malfunctioning tracking devices, in cases, these are so frequent that research goals cannot be met [27]. Notifying the vendorsof malfunctions and if possible returning the tracking devices for inspections will help improve their reliability. Most biologists would prefer collars that weigh less, are more reliable/less prone to malfunctions, generate more data and cost less. Successful vendors are constantly improving their products with these factors in mind, the ones who do not succeed will go out of business. Selected tracking devices should be tested under a range of likely environmental conditions, preferably in the study area, before deployment to confirm that they operate as expected. Such tests can be performed by fitting the tracking device to a captive animal to investigate how the animal reacts to the device and by deploying the device on a domestic animal in the study area to test how well communication performs. Two universal variables important for every study using collars are battery life and acquisition rates of GPS positions. The latter represents the raw telemetry data and are limited by the former. The values for these are generally lower in field settings than in controlled tests, therefore, specifications provided by the vendor should be viewed as the best-case scenario [26; 28]. Battery lifetime is negatively correlated to positioning and uplink interval. The appropriate positioning interval will depend on the research questions the study aims to answer: for coarse space use and life-history-related questions, one position a day and a long battery lifetime may be ideal whereas for more detailed descriptions of behavior, such as foraging strategies, an interval 30 min or less between fixes could be appropriate. Autocorrelation among fixes at short intervals no longer poses the challenge it once did to telemetry studies focused on spatial ecology, as a new generation of analytical tools has been developed [29]. Whatever fix rate is chosen, research goals and plans should reflect realistic (i.e., pessimistic) expectations of collar performance and capabilities. Once the target sampling parameters are determined, the collaring group must demonstrate the commitment of resources (funds, time, and personnel) to achieve this target and have success on the project. Estimates of the field effort required to obtain sufficient data are needed; evaluating similar studies can allow the estimation of how much time and human resources would be needed to capture and follow the required number of individuals and collect associated ground-based data, such as habitat descriptions of foraging studies. Capital costs for these projects relate to equipment (tracking devices, capture equipment, drugs), salaries, transportation, and fees for transmitting the data from the collars. Further, the post-capture data management and analytical needs can be considerable, and costs for a qualified scientist to manage these should be considered. A budget showing estimated costs is essential in the plan. The study should not be initiated until sufficient funding is secured. Pilot studies not only help inform sample size needs, they provide a valuable opportunity to refine logistical procedures and protocols, and to better estimate the project resource needs [25].