Competitive Bioblitzing (how bad an idea?)

[dlevitis]

I like that idea. Categories so both casual users and fanatics can compete if they want to.

@cthawley

one of the goals was usually to find species that were suspected to be present in the park/target area based on range/habitat but that hadn’t been documented before. So if there are any target species of interest like that, you could make observers aware.

Honestly I think if I wanted to make that list I’d need @graysquirrel to help, and she plans to compete, so…

@lynnharper

you’d probably want to attract experts in whatever taxa you think are missing (inverts, I’m guessing) and those experts might very well want to - and actually need to - do things like collect

I agree, but that’s unfortunately not legal within the park without a research permit, and we couldn’t get one that would allow for this.

@charlie

I feel like a competitive bioblitz is great fun for people who already are established inat users and understand how it all works. For newbies I think it gets problematic.

I agree, and while most of what I do is newbie focused, this would really be more for people who already know that you don’t mess around with anything that affects data quality.

@dianastuder

this blitz is like species - valid for one, or many

One blitz, two blitz, red blitz, blue blitz? I prefer one blitz, two blitzen.

@teellbee

I’m dubious about it as an approach to push for beginners or ordinary users. It seems like this approach is less likely to foster an appreciation of environment and organisms.

I would really like to visit the park on a non-competitive basis, though. :)

Agreed! This is all a ploy to get experienced naturalists to come to the park and tell us what is living where. And for those who want to do so on a non-competitive basis, free passes and warm welcomes are available. Just let me know when you are coming.

@raymie

To prevent captive/cultivated observations you could always subtract a point for every one of them.

An interesting idea! I guess one potential downside would be that (as much discussed on this forum) the application of captive/cultivated is often slippery in particular cases. How do you know this is the same tree planted here in 1893, and not its offspring? That dog escaped from its owner, and sure it still has a collar on, but it has been loose in the campground for days. Etc.

[teellbee]

@dlevitis

That dog escaped from its owner, and sure it still has a collar on, but it has been loose in the campground for days. Etc.

Oh, gee… now I’m worried about the dog. Was it dumped? Lost? If this is a real life situation, isn’t there an animal rescue group that could capture it?

I like dogs, but I don’t think dogs are very conducive to wildlife preservation.

[dlevitis]

Sorry, just a made up example. We did have a big overly friendly dog loose for days but only because its owners wouldn’t keep tabs on it. They took it home when they left. We also had someone dump a couple of young peafowl in the park, and those had to be rescued and relocated.

Dogs are allowed along the road and in the campground but not on the trails.

[cthawley]

I agree this format is best for more experienced users, but if there are teams mixing newer users with more experienced folks is a great way to teach people to use iNat and get them excited. I’ve done this with non iNat blitzes, and the less experienced folks often end up making just as many cool finds as the vets.

[raymie]

Ha I would prefer not to get into that debate right now. It would come down to the opinion of whoever’s scoring I guess. I doubt I bioblitz for a short period of time would encounter to many gray area observations, if at all.

[dlevitis]

Agreed. I want to avoid that debate too, and even though it isn’t likely to come up, I plan to avoid the question entirely.

[dlevitis]

One of the rules I’m considering is extra points for species a user hasn’t observed before. This gives experienced naturalists an incentive to have an inexperienced (or from another region) member on their team.