When we had a long discussion about problems with the CNC and suggested improvements, we found that some people interpreted “City Nature Challenge” to mean “City Nature Competition” and to view the CNC as a contest they ought to win if possible. That interpretation resulted in a number of problems, much discussed already, but also the suggestion that the CNC be named to something less sounding like a competition. People came up with several suggested names that fit the CNC acronym – City Nature Celebration and many others that I’ve forgotten.
Now, preparation for the 2026 CNC is starting, apparently still with the name “City Nature Challenge.” If we’re going to change the name, we ought to do it immediately (or sooner, were time travel possible). Are we simply not going to make such a change?
CNC uses iNaturalist as a platform for observations, but I thought they were a separate organization. Is the iNatForum the correct venue for discussing these changes?
Remind the organisers about that discussion ? I am curious how CNC26 unfolds. Both sides say they will work to pre-empt the disappointing mess that was CNC25.
Each ‘city’ decides whether to include Casual. Yet another layer of NOT an ‘equal’ competition. Mega conurbation versus a few people in a remote village - no contest, no fun, no point. If a contest, then the target needs to be something that EACH project could attempt. Find a ‘new to our ‘city’ sp’ ? Really difficult to think of a ‘universal’ target. And something like a golf handicap for previous winners, to give the second tier a chance.
PS since it is a City challenge, Not Wild should be included. For many newbies it is a learning curve to find something that iNat sees as Wild. And then, that something as flimsy and harmless as a butterfly, is Wild!
It is confusing, altho they do say they read relevant forum posts.
My whinge - I would like the projects to be NAMED - CNC26 City of Cape Town, South Africa
(Blame our municipality for the City of making it even longer) Both the lists and the maps are almost impossible to use, as you scroll and scroll and scroll.
City Nature Challenge 2025 City of Cape Town - is too long to include the country’s name - which would be useful for an international contest.
A bioblitz is always a competition for some users no matter what it’s called. Not everyone is like competent or sportsmanlike, and since many people are new to the concept of CNC every year we’re always going to have organizers not knowing what they’re doing and/or automatically assuming any event is a deathmatch. I think the better solution has nothing to do with the name and everything to do with getting CNC organizers to know how to iNat and making a global agreement to exclude Casual-grade observations.
After the experience of the last few years, I will point-blank refuse to ID or help in any way for any CNC project that allows casual observations, so I totally support you in this.
The most crushing aspect of it is to see the thousands or even tens of thousands of fraud observations that count towards some CNCs. Last year, a couple of particular projects had almost a majority of their observations be one of:
Copyrighted observations that belong to someone else
Observations made outside the time frame of the CNC, with the observation date faked to fit in
Observations made outside the locality for the CNC, with the place faked to fit in
These are not CNC observations, yet they are allowed to be. As an identifier it made me feel like the organisers were abusing me, and that they took for granted that I and other identifiers will volunteer our labour to sort this all out. It was a very unpleasant experience.
I think as long as there is a “leaderboard” listing “top” observers, some will always be competitive (no matter the name). One solution might be to remove the leaderboard for observers, but keep the leaderboards for observations, species and definitely for identifiers to encourage help with IDs.
Of course, removing the leaderboard for observers. might result in reduced participation simply because people want to see their name up high on the board (and I say this without judgment for those who are motivated by that).
I spent weeks sorting thru problems - before I realised - no response. The project I wasted my IDs on is still only 3% RG. In future I will stick to projects where observers and organisers are actively involved in IDs and resolving broken obs.
I wonder why it is the identifiers who are ignored?
I had 2 Forum posts. Organisers has already been mentioned. And this one.