In entomology it is common to catch something alive and kill it to identify it and photograph it. Should I annotate this as dead or alive? I reckon alive, as that is the condition of the creature in the habitat on the day I found it, so contributes to phenology etc. But there are aspects of iNaturalist where what seems correct to me doesn’t match the consensus, so I thought I better check.
Observaion=interaction, caught insect was alive, so alive it is.
Thanks. I’ll get annotating.
The annotation should reflect the time and place you associate with the specimen. Eg if you use the time and place of original collection, it is Alive.
This is a fascinating question - I would have assumed the opposite as one of the reasons put forward for dead/alive was to allow people to avoid photos of dead wildlife, e.g. when exploring the site with kids. However, as the annotations are little used it isn’t a reliable filter for protecting sensitive eyes.
Quite a few of the photos of dead animals that I come across are snakes who have quite possibly been killed at the time of observation, but more as a blanket response to a snake than for id purposes. & not necessarily by the observer themselves… I have been marking these ‘dead’.
But for your use case @jhbratton , I agree it makes more sense for the recording of the natural history. Thank you for bringing it up and to everyone for explaining!