Whenever I see a banded bird, I try to get pictures of the full number so I can report it. I’ve been including the info about when and where it was banded in my iNat observation, but I intentionally haven’t been posting the band number due to a concern it could be used to submit faulty sightings. However, I have seen a number of observations that do include it.
Is it better to include the band number of leave it out from an iNat observation? I’m particularly interested to get opinions from anyone who makes use of the data. Thanks!
I think the chances of someone deciding to swipe a bird band number from an INat sighting in order to file false reports about that bird’s location is pretty low. It’d be a fair degree of effort for no tangible payout, since whoever did it wouldn’t be able to see the scientists being frustrated.
There is a slight bit of “gamification” to submitting a report as they send you a (digital) certificate. I also read an article awhile ago about hunters going out of their way to collect the physical bands, which is not too far off.
I agree that it doesn’t seem worth it, but these things don’t always make sense to me. For example, the discourse I’ve seen around false iNat observations especially around CNC. I just wanted to make sure there wasn’t already a history of it being abused.
As I’m going through my pictures from today that prompted the question, it looks likely that the bands are a simple one-up scheme anyway. Since the numbers weren’t designed to have obfuscation, it seems less likely they would care about the numbers being shared.
Thanks for explaining your concerns in more detail, @entropyendeavor. I think you @fishkeeper are right to doubt that there’s any real problem with showing/listing band numbers, but there are probably a few people on the forum who have worked with banding and can (hopefully) validate that.
I’m not involved with bird banding at all, but as the person who reads basically all complaint/support emails at iNat and many flags, I can’t recall ever seeing one expressing concerns about this.
This Aplomado Falcon was hacked from a nearby location and had a pretty obvious band number on it, presumably to facilitate reports from anyone who saw it. As I recall I did report it to appropriate folks at Fish & Wildlife Service and sent them the photo.
IMO, it’s alright to add a photo that contains the birds band number as long as the bird is not captive/in-hand. If the bird is in-hand, & is still in the process of being banded, I would let the bander decide whether or not they want to share photos of the bird before it was released.
Then again this is all just my opinion, and there’s no set rules for this situation, but I do think the risk of someone reporting a banded bird w/ faulty data from a photo they saw is fairly unlikely, albeit not impossible.
Maybe I am naive. I thought birds were banded for identification, so photos of the bands would help track them? Filing false reports will probably happen because of the gamified part, so maybe THAT is the part to question. I rarely understand the need to collect false accolades, even a digital certificate.
Tracking down a particular banded but free bird would seem difficult, and a captured banded bird would be protected?
Sorry, hacked means they were temporarily caged and fed at an artificial nest and then allowed to leave but would return to the site on their own until fully independent. Basically a “soft” reintroduction of young birds.