Captive/cultivated in regards to biocontrol release

General
1

Hello all, I have been on iNat for a fairly long time and feel pretty solid on when to mark observations “captive/cultivated” or “wild”, but I’m hoping for some input on a specific observation I made several years ago. (Sorry for starting a whole thread based on one edge case, but I didn’t know who to tag in the comments to weigh in)

In this case, I was working with a biologist who was experimentally releasing boring beetles as a biocontrol agent for leafy spurge at a site over a couple years. This photo was of an individual that we had just released ~20 minutes beforehand. We did first survey the site to see if any individuals/second generations from previous releases remained at the site, and we did find one adult (I remember that being notable since previous re-surveys had not found any, and they weren’t sure if they were successfully establishing a population), but that was not the one I got this picture of if I remember correctly. Since it had been captive literally moments beforehand, I marked this observation as “captive/cultivated” at the time and I’m pretty sure it stayed that way for years, but just noticed someone has since marked it “wild” in the DQA. I do see where they’re coming from – this has always seemed like an edge case to me-- so I’m hoping for some more input from the community. Thanks in advance!

7 Likes
2

Yes, if it is still where you released and has not moved, it would still be captive.

7 Likes
3

I’ll be interested to hear what others think, but this seems pretty straightforward captive/cultivated to me. Maybe the person who marked it as “wild” thought that this individual was the offspring of a previously released generation?

It might help to further specify in your observation note that this actual, specific, particular individual was released. They may have believed that your note meant that this individual was the “result” of a release, which is potentially ambiguous.

4 Likes
4

I’d say it was captive earlier, but not anymore since it was released. Don’t see how it could have been released in an open air setting and stayed captive at the same time. From the time it was released, it was free to go anywhere.

6 Likes
5

Just as how a fish becomes captive the moment it gets put into the fish tank, the beetles become “uncaptive” the moment they are set free, as long as they are intended to not be returned to captivity.

4 Likes
6

Escaped pets and stocked fish are wild, so I don’t see why released biocontrol insects wouldn’t also be. Seems like a pretty clear-cut wild to me.

4 Likes
7

Not to get too into the weeds, but how would you define having “moved” in this context? This was a few years ago so I truly don’t fully remember, but if memory serves the beetles crawled out of the box we released them from and then up the plants on their own. I guess I’m not sure if you would consider a few feet having “moved”.

1 Like
8

I would consider that moved! It walked out of captivity box and upon a plant on its own volition. It is then wild.

4 Likes
9

In that case the neighbour’s cat visiting my garden is wild…

3 Likes
10

I’d agree with wild regardless of it having moved or not.
Moving is a choice the animal is as free to make as staying put.

3 Likes
11

This

is not what iNat asks us to evaluate though.

The definition of captive/cultivated is:
“Checking captive / cultivated means that the observation is of an organism that exists in the time and place it was observed because humans intended it to be then and there.”

In the case of a biocontrol release, the individual organism certainly would not have been in that time/place unless humans intended it to be there. In fact, the organism was bred in captivity and raised, much like a domesticated animal or pet, for this explicit human-intended purpose.

There’s certainly a gray area about what movement/time is “enough” after a release to qualify as the organism’s intent to move and thus whether it should now be considered wild. The OP’s original post stated

and described a very recent release. For me, that’s enough to say it is still essentially where a human intended it to be. If someone wants to get really technical, the human releaser certainly intended the insect to leave the box and go on the vegetation right there - if the insect hadn’t left the box, I’d wager it would have been forcibly evicted!

Given the OP’s description, and that the insect hadn’t moved appreciably, I’d still call it wild.

Otherwise, under the reasoning you gave above, literally any animal that is not being actively restrained by a human would be wild as we wouldn’t be able to definitely say that it did not have an intention to be in that time and place. For instance

would be wild, along with a dog momentarily stepping out the front door (which it intended to) right before its owner puts the leash on it.

On the other hand, we know these aren’t what iNat intends, because one of the examples for Wild is “snake that you just picked up (yes, it’s in your hand where you intended it to be, but the place and time is where the snake intended to be)”

Just because an animal has been moved a tiny amount by a human doesn’t make it not wild (if it was otherwise wild).

Likewise, one of the examples for captive is “your pet such as a dog or cat” - just because they aren’t physically restrained at the moment of observation, doesn’t mean that they are wild. The pet cat on its porch is still not wild, even though it could conceivably have taken off to become a feral cat anytime it wanted to.

6 Likes
12

I think this perfectly represents the beetle in question as well, considering that specific individual was intended to be at that site at that exact time by people. IMO its a clear-cut case of a captive organism, but all descendants of that beetle in that location would be considered wild.

6 Likes
13

I feel like, and it seems like this has been stated, is that if the beetle species persists in that area in a second generation, that would count as a wild observation. However, the beetle in its newly released state would be captive.

4 Likes
14

I think part of the problem is that iNat defines “captive” and “wild” in ways that differ from their common usage. A captive bird in a cage (that was put there because it was found injured seconds earlier) is “wild”, while a tree growing in a forest for 50 years (that was planted by people as a sapling) is “captive”. Likewise a captive insect that was transported 500 miles across country against its will, and photographed still stuck inside a vehicle, is considered “wild”.

I don’t think the intention of the captive vs wild was to consider individuals that had been deliberately released into the wild shortly before they were observed as “wild”. Finding different words that better match the definitions that iNat choses could help clear up these edge cases.

4 Likes
15

I don’t think it is intended as a rule to be followed to the word, though. Shall we sit next to a beetle and wait for its first step so that it suddenly becomes wild? One small step for beetle, one huge step towards an iNaturalist verifiable observation.
Also, what about insects that have briefly been caught for ID then re-released? All captive if we were to follow this rule to the letter. It doesn’t make sense.

The reason I’d say biocontrol is a grey area is that it was intended to be in the general area by humans, and not just in one specific place. But I think it’s similar enough to released pets (which are wild in an iNat sense) to be a wild observation because upon release, it’s much more the animal’s choice where it is than the human’s.

5 Likes
16

No, not really, this is just a strawman.

Only if they were set free and now live on their own. If they were released an hour ago to go for a walk and they will return as always, they are not wild. They are just pets the went for a walk.

2 Likes
17

As cthawley has cited iNat’s definition, we can see that it is quite unclear. Neither “there” nor “then” are defined and it generally leaves much room for interpretation. With my argument I had hoped to express my opinion that just following this definition therefore is not sufficient.
One approach that would clarify things is of course to define a certain amount of time or area inside of which the organism still cannot be considered wild. As these will necessarily be arbitrary values, I am against this approach.

Indeed, but here, we are not talking pets on a walk. We are talking deliberately setting an animal free with the intention of it then being, functionally, a wild animal. Again, to me, it doesn’t make sense to define a period and/or determine a radius in which the animal is not yet wild, because any such definition will be based on an arbitrary value. It makes much more sense to go with the intention of the person who set it free (or what it is likeliest to be, if unknown).

I also think the idea of only considering its descendants wild is a good one. That way the definition at least isn’t arbitrary. But in my opinion, that approach only makes practical sense for obligate sessile organisms and it will be impossible to know or to guess for an outsider.

2 Likes
18

How is it different from rearing vultures, wild sheep, or deer (in outdoor pens/aviaries, free from predation diseases hunters) – to be released later in order to reinforce wild populations?

4 Likes
19

Personally, I would give it the escapee treatment, but of course an escapee wanted to be there while the human did not, which isn’t entirely the case here, but my opinions on captive/wild are a lot more liberal than a few others on the platform. I believe this situation is quite subjective and depends on the observer’s opinion. If iNat makes its stance clear on released animals (for rewilding/biocontrol or anything else) it would solve this problem and other debates that I’ve seen happen about similar situations in the forums.

20

I doubt it, considering that this is an issue for which every conceivable edge case has to have its own separate discussion thread. No matter what “better” definitions we come up with, someone will come up with edge cases for those, too.

Covered speccifically under