I’ve come across many observations of trafficked wildlife from the Amazon, but I started wondering when should an animal be considered as captive on this site. If we’re talking about a zoo, rescue center, or any other institution with legally or illegally captive wildlife, then the observation is obviously casual and the shouldn’t be RG.
What I’m wondering now, however, is what if we’re talking about a wild animal that was captured by the locals. The species is definitely located in the area, but the animal wasn’t found “in the wild”. Many communities capture wildlife for tourists to take photos of, which is a considerable source of income for them. This is something we’re trying to stop, as it promotes wildlife trafficking for wildlife selfie tourism, but are some of these animals “captive”, or not?
Look at this anaconda: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/5074844, it is definitely captive, as it’s in an open area of grass (hard to find in the rainforest, unless we’re talking about a community or other location with people, who actually maintain and cut the grass). Looking at other observations form the area of that same user (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?nelat=-2.117205161943781&nelng=-73.43811638981745&place_id=any&subview=grid&swlat=-2.494553709086103&swlng=-74.74480279118464&taxon_id=355675&user_id=jaico), most of the mammals and some reptiles are captive, but I’d bet they were captured nearby. This means that the animals are present in the area. One thing I love about iNat is that it helps to better map species presence/distribution thanks to citizen scientists, so I’m wondering if these kind of observations should be marked as captive or not.
Note: I’m not talking about baited individuals.