I presume you are aware of this article in the UK hoverfly project, but in case it’s of any use to you, this was my attempt to do something similar in a more limited taxonomic application https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/uk-hoverflies-syrphidae/journal/77600-optimise-your-own-observations-for-the-uk-hoverfly-recording-scheme/
4 Likes
Yes, indeed asteroidowl.
Thanks for the link to your hoverfly article Matthew, I hadn’t seen it previously, an interesting read.
1 Like
Thanks for a few useful and interesting suggestions Matthew, appreciated. I will try and incorporate them a little later
1 Like
Oh, and
- You should link to NBN’s advice on ‘pinned locations’ as an alternative to obscuration.
https://uk.inaturalist.org/posts/62014-location-location-location
1 Like
Thanks Matthew — that’s genuinely helpful. I agree on all three points.
• Display Name vs Username:
Good call. I’ll make that distinction explicit. A lot of newer users don’t realise that the username is irrelevant to the UK pipeline, and that it’s the Display Name that matters for iRecord and the schemes.
• Optional, cooperative framing:
Absolutely — the intention is to offer guidance for people who want their iNat records to integrate smoothly with the national system, not to tell anyone how they “should” record. I’ll add a clear introductory line to make that explicit and keep the tone as inviting as possible.
• Notes not being transmitted:
Yes — that’s a frustrating limitation of the bridge. I’ll keep encouraging notes because they’re valuable on iNat itself, but I’ll add a line explaining that they don’t currently pass through to iRecord, so verifiers may need to click through to see them.
Thanks again — these refinements will make the guidance clearer and more useful wherever it’s shared.
My comment is equally applicable to iN generally
Best practice for using iNat in the UK. Use your real name.
That - first off is only true for UK’s iRecord. For iNatters in the UK there is NO requirement, no ‘best practice’ around insisting on your real name. Real name is absolutely NOT an iNat requirement / best practice. This is confusing people by inventing a rule which does not exist.
Even iNat’s own staff do not all use real names https://www.inaturalist.org/people/seastarya
Best practice for using iNat with the UK’s iRecord. Use your real name.
2 Likes
Thanks Diana — that’s a very fair point, and I’m glad you raised it.
You’re absolutely right that iNaturalist itself does not require or recommend the use of real names, and nothing in this guidance is intended to imply an iNat rule or platform expectation. Many iNat staff and long‑standing users don’t use their real names, and that’s completely fine.
The point in the document is specifically about the UK biological recording system, which is separate from iNat. If someone wants their observations to move smoothly through the UK pipeline (iNat → iRecord → County Recorders → NBN Atlas), then using a real name in the Display Name field helps because that is the name that gets passed to iRecord. It’s optional, and only relevant for people who want their records to be used in that system.
I’ve now updated the wording to make this distinction much clearer:
“If you want your records to integrate with the UK’s biological recording system, use your real name (via your Profile’s Display Name). This is not an iNaturalist requirement.”
Hopefully that removes any confusion and keeps the guidance firmly in the “optional, UK‑specific” category where it belongs.
Thanks again for the nudge — clarity always helps.
2 Likes
Thanks for the constructive input everyone, it has helped (I think). So, here, below, is what I anticipate to be the ‘final’ version of “Best Practice for Using iNaturalist in the UK:” - I will not be taking it any further but should anyone else feel like doing so then please do ‘help yourself’.
Best Practice for Using iNaturalist in the UK
A practical, optional guide to help your observations integrate smoothly with the UK biological recording system
This guidance is entirely optional. You can use iNaturalist however you like.
These suggestions simply help your observations flow more easily into the UK’s national recording infrastructure (iRecord → County Recorders → NBN Atlas). Many UK verifiers and schemes have contributed to shaping this advice.
- If you want your records to integrate with the UK’s biological recording system, use your real name (via your Profile’s Display Name):
This is not an iNaturalist requirement, and it is not a general iNat best practice.
It is simply something that helps the UK’s iRecord system and County Recorders, because iRecord receives your Display Name, not your username.
Key distinction:
• Your username (e.g. “SteveMcBill”) is not sent to iRecord.
• Your Display Name is sent to iRecord.
Your Display Name is set in your Profile.
You can keep any username you like — just ensure your real name appears in your Display Name/Profile if you’re comfortable doing so.
This helps:
• County Recorders recognise you
• Verifiers contact you if needed
• Your records gain trust more quickly
• Your long‑term contributions build a reputation - Record with Reasonable Location Precision:
Precise locations are one of iNat’s greatest strengths.
• Use your phone’s GPS or a dedicated GPS device
• Aim for a reasonably precise pin
• Avoid very large accuracy circles
(I tend to use a 2 metre accuracy circle for over 95% of my records)
• Only obscure locations for genuinely sensitive species
For an alternative to obscuration, see NBN’s guidance on pinned locations:
https://uk.inaturalist.org/posts/62014-location-location-location
The aim is clarity, not perfection. - Provide Clear, Diagnostic Photographs:
A record is only as strong as its evidence.
• Multiple angles
• Close‑ups of diagnostic features
• Habitat context where relevant
• Sharp, well‑lit images
Essential for tricky taxa such as leaf mines, galls, bryophytes, lichens, and many invertebrates. - Change Your Licence Settings:
To allow UK conservation bodies to use your data:
• Set your observation licence to CC‑BY
• Set your photo licence to CC‑BY
Otherwise Local Environmental Record Centres cannot use your Research Grade observations. - Match the Location Name to the Pin (when practical):
Autogenerated names (“Near X”, “Somewhere in Y”) are often too vague.
• Edit the location name to reflect the actual place
• Use official site names (SSSI, LNR, reserve) when relevant
If the pin and text name disagree, verifiers may question which is correct. - Add the Life Stage for Invertebrates (and for other Orders):
Many UK schemes treat life stages separately.
• Add life stage (adult, larva, pupa, egg, or relevant elements such as flowering, green leaves, etc.)
• Use the “Life Stage” annotation - Add Brief Habitat or Micro‑habitat Notes:
Examples:
• “Damp hollow, north‑facing bank”
• “On rotten birch log, shaded”
• “Calcareous grassland margin”
• “Compacted path edge”
Important: These notes do not transfer to iRecord, even though iRecord has a field for them.
Verifiers can click through to the original iNat record, but they won’t know to unless prompted. - Avoid Over‑reliance on AI Suggestions:
The computer vision tool is helpful but not authoritative.
• Treat suggestions as hints
• Only agree if confident
• Choose a higher taxon if unsure
This prevents incorrect IDs becoming Research Grade. - Engage with Identifiers and Verifiers:
Communication is valued in the UK system.
• Respond to questions
• Provide extra photos if asked
• Clarify habitat or location when needed
• Be open to correction - Use iNat’s Strengths — Don’t Fight Them:
iNat excels at:
• Photographic evidence
• Precise GPS
• Timestamped observations
• Distribution mapping
• Long‑term continuity
These complement the UK’s traditional systems beautifully. - Record Common Species as Well as Rare Ones:
Common species are essential for:
• Distribution modelling
• Habitat assessment
• Climate change studies
• Baseline monitoring
Recording them is ecological mapping, not padding. - Respect the UK Validation Pipeline:
iNat → iRecord → County Recorders → National Schemes.
To help verifiers:
• Ensure IDs are solid
• Provide clear evidence
• Avoid speculative IDs
• Keep your profile transparent - Contribute to the Community Where You Can:
If you have expertise:
• Help identify observations
• Confirm common species
• Correct misidentifications gently
• Support beginners
Summary:
High‑quality iNat recording in the UK is built on:
• Accuracy
• Transparency
• Good evidence
• Ecological context
• Constructive engagement
2 Likes
Your ‘best practice’ = how I want you all to do it.
Your title remains confusing, to put it kindly.
2 Likes
There are multiple topics already existing on that issue already - this is one I started https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/can-a-reminder-be-circulated-to-members-about-need-to-mark-cutivated-captive-v-wild/72472?u=asteroidowl
There’s also a open feature request on changing how iNat deals with certain not wild plants. https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/make-captive-cultivated-not-automatically-no-id-needed
1 Like
“By the way, is there still an active UK iNat Discord? If so, could someone share the current invite link?” Many thanks. Steve
As for 2) (“accuracy”), assuming this Best Practice List is aimed at the average Jane/Joe who is probably using a smartphone rather than a dedicated ‘GPS’ device… I’d suggest first and foremost to get hold of a device that is capable of achieving high accuracy [rapidly] (i.e. with dual-frequency and/or EGNOS abilities). This empirical list (online spreadsheet, sourced from benevolent users of a famous ‘GPSTest’ app) should cover the most common brands, and many models.
2 Likes
closing to focus discussion in one place (see new topic https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/guidelines-best-practice-for-using-inaturalist-in-the-uk/74370/)