That’s surprising, since there are a bunch.
Related feature requests:
- Further restrict changes to taxon geoprivacy
- Include obscured observations in species lists for place-based projects
- Larger concealment areas for obscured taxa
- Add option for smaller obscuring area
- Option to hide time (show just the date)
- Provide a place to post conservation status/obscuration decisions
- Add New Conservation Status Authorities
And some related general discussions:
- Geoprivacy, Obscuring, and Auto Obscure Discussion
- Criteria used for obscuring taxa?
- Some observations don’t show up in projects - is poaching really the concern?
- Out-of-date NatureServe conservation status?
- On conservation status, endemics and invasive species
- Species not appearing as Vulnerable, not obscured
- Obscuring on map vs lists
- Access to data for sensitive and obscured observations
In every place except Canada, iNaturalist curators already have permission to change taxon geoprivacy. The guidelines are here: https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/curator+guide#geoprivacy
Since this subject has been covered so much in the linked topics (and more!) I request that folks:
- please flag a taxon for curation if it looks like it should be obscured and isn’t currently. You can do this by going to the taxon page, then clicking Curation>Flag for curation. The “reason” section for the flag is rather small, but when the flag saves, there is a link to view it and add a longer comment. From there you would add your reasoning, such as that there is evidence it’s being poached in that area, and observations on a site like iNat would contribute to that (vs. some heavily poached taxa which are quite easy to find without need for a tool like iNat)
- read through the linked topics and participate in those that are relevant
- create a specific actionable feature request for preferred changes to how geoprivacy currently works
- or open a new discussion topic with a bit narrower subject focus