The document summarizes a research project testing mobile software options for efficient field data collection by the Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Centre (ACCDC). The ACCDC maintains a biodiversity database and conducts field inventories. The project tested Juniper Aspect and CyberTracker software on a Juniper Archer 2 device. While both showed potential, neither proved adequate for the ACCDC's large dataset due to slow loading times. The next steps may include testing ArcPad software.

1. Final Research Project for the Atlantic
Canada Conservation Data Centre
Project by Brian Bower
Advanced Diploma in Geographic
Sciences - GIS

2.  Introduction
 The Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Centre
 Project Goals
 Juniper Systems Archer 2
 CyberTracker
 Juniper Aspect
 Aspect vs. CyberTracker
 Results
 Conclusions
 Acknowledgements

3.  Established in 1997
 Located in Sackville, New Brunswick
 Maintain a biodiversity database for Atlantic Canada holding over
one million records.
 Information about zoology, landscape ecology and forestry.
 The ACCDC conducts accurate field inventories, status
assessments to make significant contributions to conservation
planning and decision making.

4.  The ACCDC is partnered with:
 The Canadian Wildlife Service
 Atlantic Forestry Centre
 Government of Nova Scotia
 Government of New Brunswick
 Government of Prince Edward Island
 Government of Newfoundland and Labrador
 The Nature Conservancy

5.  The ACCDC collects data on rare vegetation species in the field as
well as information on birds, mammals, butterflies, reptiles and
amphibians.
 The ACCDC used to use a Compaq Ipaq tablet computer to collect
data.
 Also used paper notes that required a considerable amount of post
processing time in the office.

6.  To help the ACCDC find a solution for efficient field data
collection.
 Test software that is compatible with the Juniper Systems Archer 2.
 Set up custom dropdown menus, numeric and text boxes for the
ACCDC’s dataset.
 If possible to set up text autocomplete to cut down scrolling
through the data in the field.
 To help the ACCDC cut down on post processing time in the office.

7. The Archer 2 Geo Model was purchased by the ACCDC to help
with their needs in the field. A machine that is not only field
ready, but it is easy to use and runs on the flexible Windows
Mobile Platform.

8.  Runs on the Windows Mobile Operating System.
 The Geo Model has an onboard GPS necessary for the ACCDC’s
needs in the field.
 Heavy duty frame to withstand falling from a considerable height,
can be dropped in water. All connections are sealed in the back of
the device to prevent water damage.
 Includes a physical numeric keyboard. All other typing is done on
a touchscreen that works with fingers or the included stylus.
 The operating system allows the machine to work with many
available software options.

9.  For this project two pieces of software were used tested for the
project that were capable of setting up custom data dictionaries
for mobile devices including the Juniper Systems Archer 2.
 CyberTracker
 Juniper Aspect

10.  CyberTracker is an open source field data collection software
developed in South Africa.
 Available for use on Juniper Systems Archer 2,
Mesa Rugged Notepad, Android and iOS.
 Was designed for users to set up a custom,
data dictionary easily with no programming.
 It was used by tribes people in Africa who
didn’t know how to read text. Pictures can be
used instead of text for recording data.

11.  Works on a screen to screen method.The option to have single
select, multi select, text, numeric screens.

13. PROS CONS
 Open Source.
 Works on multiple
Platforms.
 Easy to use.
 Has a virtual GPS to test the
flow of the users
application before
installing on a GPS or other
field computer.
 Did not work well with the
large dataset.
 Worked poorly or not at all
when installed on the
Archer 2.
 Looks outdated.
 Point data collection only.

14.  Juniper Aspect is a product made by Juniper Systems for use on
their field computers.
 As with other pieces of software, it allows the user to come up with
a customized data dictionary. It is also possible to map points on
the desktop software.

15.  Attributes were uploaded using CSV files. One is titled Default
Objects Catalog.The other is titled Object Types.
 The default objects catalog CSV had all of the
attributes.
 Object Types CSV had the categories as well
as if the type was to be point, line or polygon.
 Once uploaded to Aspect, the other categories
that the ACCDC wanted were manually typed.
 Choices were text, numeric, decimal and date.

20. PROS CONS
 Easy to use.
 Excellent attribute uploading
method.
 Works well on the Archer 2.
 Well documented.
 Modern interface.
 Worked well with a small
dataset.
 Exports to CSV, KML, Esri
Shapefile, geodatabase.
 Access to ArcGIS Online
basemaps.
 The large dataset for plants
slowed the Archer 2 down.
 Entering field note categories
had to be done several times.
No simple solution.
 The categories had to be
numbered because it
automatically puts in-field
attributes in alphabetical
order.

21.  CyberTracker can be used on many devices including Android
and iOS devices. Aspect is for Juniper Systems devices only.
 CyberTracker is open source while Juniper Aspect costs $650 USD
for the desktop/mobile software. $350 annual license renewal.
 Aspect has access to ArcGIS Online basemaps. Can do point, line
and polygon data. CyberTracker only works with point data.
 Both packages export to CSV. Data has to be queried with
CyberTracker. Aspect exports to CSV as well as other formats and
is more flexible.
 Both could cut down on post processing time in the office.

22.  Both programs had a lot of potential but neither proved 100%
worthwhile.
 Both programs didn’t work well with the large dataset.
CyberTracker went slow on the desktop and did not work on the
Archer 2.
 The Aspect software worked great on the desktop and would cut
down on post processing time. With the smaller list of attributes,
(birds, butterflies, mammals, reptiles and amphibians) Aspect
worked great in the field. Easy to collect point, line and polygon
data.The plant dataset didn’t work well with Aspect due to lengthy
loading times in the field.This doesn’t help speed up data
collection.

23.  Neither program had a text based auto complete option for the
dataset.
 Custom dropdowns worked well with both programs.
 Both programs would cut down on post processing time in the
office.

24.  The Archer 2 was a great investment for the Atlantic Canada
Conservation Data Centre.
 It is a flexible piece of equipment that is field ready and will be
able to do what the ACCDC requires.
 There is a lot of potential with both pieces of software but neither
piece of software is adequate.
 The next step would be to try ArcPad. However this is expensive.
 The ACCDC knows what the next step is to help meet their needs
for field data collection and cut down on post processing time.

25.  Thanks to Sean Blaney and James Churchill at the Atlantic Canada
Conservation Centre for sponsoring the project and providing
support as well as great communication throughout the last five
weeks.
 Thanks to the customer support team at Juniper Systems for their
help and guidance.
 Thanks to Dave MacLean at COGS for supervising the project.

26.  Atlantic Canada Conservation Data Centre:www.accdc.com
 CyberTracker: www.cybertacker.org
 Juniper Systems:www.junipersys.com
 Juniper Systems Archer 2: http://www.junipersys.com/Juniper-
Systems-Rugged-Handheld-Computers/products/Archer-2