Positioning

How meshtrap sits alongside existing products in the NZ predator-control ecosystem. For the engineering-level scan with sources, see ../prior-art.md. This document reads as a product story.

The ecosystem in one picture

   Trap mechanism        Strike / state              Reporting / coordination
   ─────────────────     ─────────────────           ─────────────────────────
   Goodnature A24       │ Goodnature Chirp (BLE)
   NZ AutoTraps AT220   │
   DOC200 / Trapinator  │ Econode (LoRaWAN)
   (manual, single-set) │ WheroNet (LoRaWAN)         ► Trap.NZ
                        │ Encounter Celium (VHF)
                        │ ZIP (LoRa + Iridium)
                        │ Cacophony cameras (Wi-Fi)
                        │
                        │ meshtrap (LoRa, mesh-tier, open)

Three layers, with meshtrap sitting in the middle.

We are not competing with

• The traps themselves. Goodnature, NZ AutoTraps, DOC200, Trapinator, and others remain the kill / capture mechanisms. meshtrap attaches to any of these as a sensor / reporting layer.
• Trap.NZ. It is the national platform for trap record-keeping and remains the canonical place servicing events are logged. meshtrap reports into Trap.NZ; it does not duplicate it.
• Self-resetting CO2 traps. Goodnature’s Chirp accessory already serves their own product line over BLE. We don’t reach into that closed ecosystem.

We are competing with — partially

• Econode SmartTrap (LoRaWAN sensor, NZ-built, closed firmware, several hundred NZD per node). Same problem space; we differ on openness, mesh topology, and cost.
• WheroNet IoT (LoRaWAN sensor, community-friendly pricing, closed firmware). Closest direct precedent. We differ on openness and router-tier mesh extending coverage beyond gateway reach.
• Encounter Celium (proprietary narrowband VHF, premium pricing, best-in-class propagation). We do not claim to match Celium’s range in dense bush. We compete on cost and openness, not on radio.

We are adjacent to

• ZIP’s LoRa-to-Iridium hybrid. Used in DOC’s most remote “remove-and-protect” zones. We are a generalist platform; ZIP is specialist back-country gear. We can interoperate via shared LoRa protocol expectations, but we are not aiming at the same deployments.
• Cacophony Project / DOC AI Cam. Thermal-AI cameras for predator detection. Different layer of the stack — detection rather than trap state — but a future deployment might share the meshtrap backhaul.

What this means for a buying decision

• You already have Trap.NZ records and need remote sensing on a budget: meshtrap, or WheroNet if you want a turnkey commercial option.
• You need premium propagation in dense bush, money no object: Celium.
• You are DOC running a large managed deployment in cell coverage: Econode or WheroNet at scale.
• You are deploying in the back country with no cell or LoRaWAN coverage: ZIP’s stack, or meshtrap with cellular / satellite at the hub.
• You are a community group or individual contributor: meshtrap or WheroNet, depending on appetite for self-hosting.
• You want to research, fork, or extend the platform: meshtrap is the only open option.

How we describe ourselves

In a sentence:

meshtrap is an open-source LoRa platform for predator-trap monitoring, built for federated community use and integrating natively with Trap.NZ.

What we avoid saying:

• “Outperforms” anyone on radio range. (We don’t.)
• “Industry-leading” anything. (Brand-new project.)
• “Eliminates the need to visit traps.” (It doesn’t; animal welfare requires physical inspection.)
• “Mesh network” without qualifying — endpoints don’t mesh; only the router tier does.

How others might describe us

In a year or two, ideally:

meshtrap is the open option community trapping groups use when they want remote monitoring without locking themselves into a vendor.

If we get that, we’ve done the job.