Differences in Mapped Bird Range and Actual Observation

I live mostly in Kenya, right up on top of the Rift Valley edge. Quite a common bird to encounter around where I live is the Yellow-crowned Canary (Serinus flavivertex.) In fact, a day almost never goes by without me hearing its call at least once. But, the range depicted on the iNat species page map, although relatively close to my location, has a significant distance from the bird population I observe daily and the regions where this species usually occurs. In my opinion (non-professional of course,) the birds where I live have a significant and yearly presence, and my area should be under the species range. Does anyone know the proper authorities to contact (iNat or other) to make aware of this, considering Kenya has many bird experts and enthusiasts who might be interested?

iNaturalist mainly gets range maps from the IUCN Red List data. Looking at the species page there, it looks like that map might be the source of the one on iNaturalist.


I’m not sure they should be considered accurate down to a micro level. Another option to see a potentially more complete map on iNat is on the taxa page on the map tab, click the 3 stacked paper icon in the top right and turn on the GBIF observations overlay. That is a much larger dataset showing known locations, and very likely is more accurate.

It may be worth comparing with the eBird range map:


My impression is that most birders primarily use eBird rather than iNaturalist & I would trust eBird data over IUCN range maps.

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.