@jurga_li is very kind about helping with lichens (so long as the photos are usable)
6 Likes
As someone who observes mostly insects, a lot of my observations are stuck at Needs ID. Some can go a long time without any activity and some are just not good enough to get to species or genus. What I have tried doing is submit some of my arachnids and insects to BugGuide.net. Although is it not a site as user friendly as iNaturalist, and you will most likely need a variety of features to get a species level identification, It’s a great resource to get your observations identified. Through BugGuide I have found that some of my observations are the first records for that species in my state for iNaturalist.
8 Likes
Or even leave the old pic, and add the new one as an additional photo.
4 Likes
No!
Leave the observations up. Often it takes a very long time before they get IDs, but that’s ok. Other times you might learn more about the taxa and revisit an old observation to update the ID.
Where I am it’s common for observations to go for many years with no supporting IDs, then, all of a sudden a bunch that have been inactive for 3 or 4 years get an ID.
Even ones that don’t get a supporting ID are useful as it shows what’s in the area, where people are going, etc, and can provide very useful information even if it’s not about the organism observed.
Deleting them also potentially messes with future identifications as even un-ID’d observations are useful as a reference for comparison. It’s not uncommon for me to refer back to an observation I came across but couldn’t ID to compare it with other organisms.
8 Likes
If you think you have trouble with plants and insects, you should try marine inverts. We’re still waiting for someone to agree with our Phylum IDs.
12 Likes
I’d also say no.
I’ve only been a user of iNaturalist for 6 or 7 weeks so there are more observations needing IDs that I did not see when they were first recorded than I will ever get around to looking at. However, that doesn’t mean I’ll never look at any of them. In the last week I have suggested IDs for observations made more than 2 years ago because they came up in searches.
5 Likes
Everyone should try water inverts, that way those thousands of missing species will finally make it to the iNat database.
5 Likes
Several have mentioned “tagging” someone who is more experienced with a given taxon. How does one do this?
2 Likes
iNat has grown so huge that observations get buried almost immediately. There was a time, a few years ago, when I had caught up on identifying every vascular plant observed in Ontario (Canada). With the volume of observations now, it’s physically impossible for me to keep up, even with botanists from around the world contributing their identifications.
All of this is just to reassure you that just because your observations haven’t been verified doesn’t mean they aren’t worth keeping. Some tiny percentage of the iNat community actually identifies observations for others, so stuff gets buried faster than we can keep up. Chances are, your observations will get verified over time as taxonomic experts find them.
16 Likes
Just add @name in a comment.
3 Likes
I found unconfirmed close up Chaffinch that was uploaded 7 months ago, almost unbelievable.
6 Likes
Yes - excellent idea. Will try it. Thanks
2 Likes
I am using AND LOVING iNaturalist for more than 6 years now. I take little time for uploading, though i had truly some 1000s of potential obss. as saved photos.
For a long while my obss. were not noticed, or IDed at all, what didn’t bother me anyway.
By time i had increasing virtual contact with highly estimated iNat colleagues, leading to increased IDs upon my (way too few) obss.
the more contacts you are caring about, the more earned IDs, that simple.
Best regards
Erwin
7 Likes
I really enjoy iNaturalist. And, I have discovered that there are people waiting for you to upload observations so that they can ID them. I appreciate this because I am new to trying to ID insects. And, I like exchanging messages with them. But, there are some observations that I have entered that have sat for awhile. I have also used various Facebook Groups to get help with an ID with insects. I have found that there is a specialty group on Facebook for just about everything. This is not to downgrade iNat in any way. But, there are people who are using Facebook that don’t use iNat. I think the important thing is to get a good ID on something regardless of the source.
5 Likes
@dianastuder thanks for your trust, but I will be of very little help with North American lichens, Though I am surprised, that they did not get attention so far. There is quite active community IDing lichens in North America,I am suprised that nobody has come up yet.
1 Like
This is so very right. I used to identify (when identifiable) almost every lichen that was uploaded in Europe. Not anymore. There are just too many of them. Thankfully though, new lichenologists have appeared, so at least part of the job is done. I still keep afloat with South African lichens and hopefully will be keeping.
4 Likes
You’re right, but iNat also allows other people use your data while it will be eventually lost in a Facebook group, though seeking id from other resources is a good idea anyway, especially for groups that lack attention.
3 Likes
iNat has a lot more people who submit observations than who spend much time identifying. Instead of deleting old observations, how about spending the time identifying others’ obs? And encouraging other iNatters to identify too?
9 Likes
erwin_pteridophilos and rowan_m make a good point. If you identify observations, some of the observers will start to identify some of yours. It’s a slow process, but gradually you will get some “followers” who see your observations as you post them and may identify them if they know them.
7 Likes
I mostly ID, and rarely post my own (just the problem children, or unusually interesting ones) Keeping up with local obs is a grateful learning curve for me, since I am mostly interested in what’s blooming here now. But the NOT flowers can have their own fascination.
3 Likes