OzFish Adelaide are collecting sightings of life around and in select waterways. Anglers freely describe fish they have caught and released (undersized, undesirable or ‘catch and release’). Is there a valid way of collecting that anecdotal evidence?
you can enter observations without a photo and with the provided ID and notes, but keep in mind they will always be casual grade. Always best if they can take a photo of everything they catch, as the records will be eligible for RG, and also any misIDs can be corrected
3 Likes
For the original question I can only repeat what’s been said. You can use the keyword filter for the words you names.
“Undersized” only brings up 2 results for me though.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?iconic_taxa=Actinopterygii&q=undersized
Slightly offtopic but eventually related. I came across a user who has tons of fish photographed on an anglers boat and in a store where the fish is sold on tables. That’s all supposed to go straight into casual, right?
Thankyou. I presume the only suitable entry method is CSV, so I tried that - still in process. Fingers crossed. With those anglers who seem interested I discuss iNaturalist. One fellow reckoned it sounded a great way to record catches with (I presumed) his special needs client. Another activity when they get home!
2 Likes
I think your ‘off topic’ comment is ‘on topic’. Anglers generally don’t like to give away their hot spots, so I have been telling them to record the catches at the boat ramp. At least it is then a public record. Opinions from others?
1 Like
I recommend choosing a random place nearby and making the accuracy circle big enough to include the original spot (it can also be several miles in size). The other option is to obscure the record. Boatramp with a small accuracy circle might not be representing the original place enough (in terms of habitat, for example). Ideally, reporters should make sure their original spot is somehow within the accuracy circle.
5 Likes
If the location is not accurate then the observation cannot be anything other than casual.
1 Like
This sounds like an interesting application. The location should be marked as that of the catch, not the boat ramp. The observers could either obscure the location (https://help.inaturalist.org/en/support/solutions/articles/151000169938-what-is-geoprivacy-what-does-it-mean-for-an-observation-to-be-obscured-) or create a location with a large accuracy circle that includes the catch location.
If they want to use the boat ramp (or any other location where the fish wasn’t caught) as a location, they should downvote “Location is accurate” in the DQA which would make the observation casual grade.
2 Likes
I just obscure my mushroom hunting observations. It also lets ME go back and see where I snagged that big yellow one
3 Likes
If it is downvoted in the DQA.
Well, if they obscure it, then they can allow certain people access to the data.
1 Like
It would depend a bit on circumstances and how it’s recorded. An organism photographed later, but with the location input as where and when it was first found, should be fine. Say, picking up a seashell at the beach at 6am, taking it back to the hotel to photograph better, and then giving its location and time as that spot on the beach at 6am.
1 Like