Cool design! Would be nice to exclude casual observations, as there’s no way for me to observe a wild betta fish and clownfish in New Jersey haha
1 Like
I added an option now to search for a location
That’s true, is there an option in the api to exclude casual observations? what is the definition of a casual observation?
I will add a taxon search option
1 Like
@glauber735 I forked your repo, added a wild only search option (url includes “captive=false”), a taxon ID option, and an option to include all the user’s observations when comparing to the local set. I’m also having issues with the place search, I recommend reverting it until it can be tested more thoroughly.
I opened a pull request, let me know if you don’t want me making these and I’ll just maintain a separate fork for my own use.
1 Like
Looks like I’m one Iceland Gull away from having all the most common species in Nova Scotia observed ;)
2 Likes
@glauber735 I also added an option to restrict by month - when I go to new places, I do this exact process manually to see what is both local spatially and temporally. Again, great tool!
2 Likes
Hi @glauber735 , I am the creator of the failed browser extension that Pisum mentioned 
:
I absolutely love your tool and it’s very similar to what I tried to do! Though after receiving the same constructive feedback from Pisum, I struggled to implement the suggested change, mostly because i admittedly relied heavily on ChatGPT and it seemed to not know of the new lifelist API.
So I just wanted to ask if you’d consider applying your tool to the official website through a browser extension. A browser extension approach significantly improves ease of use as it allows you to use the standard filtering options already implemented by iNat. I am in no way trying to promote my tool, quite the opposite, I think yours is much better (because of the speed) and if it existed as a browser extension i think it would be even better!
what do you think?
Kind regards,
Timothy
1 Like
Thanks, that’s fun! It’s a nice interface.
I used the whole state of Vermont as my place, and I have 79/100.
It’s very interesting to me that some of the species I don’t have observations for are among the most common things that I see all the time. Such as Sugar Maple and Paper Birch… they’re practically synonymous with Vermont, and yet I apparently take them for granted.
It’s also very interesting what species are in the top ten. Ring-billed gull? We’re a land-locked state, but apparently they are common enough over on Lake Champlain to put them in the top 100 of all species, not just birds. And American Elm? I thought they were mostly gone, but apparently they are all over the map.
Things that I am delighted to see made the top 100 list: Monarchs and Milkweed, Salamanders, Frogs and Newts, Bears, Beavers, Bumblebees and Bald Eagles.
1 Like
You have to put in the place ID, 129747 for Perth for example.
1 Like
I’ll see what I can do and ping you with it if @glauber735 doesn’t beat me to it 
This is something I’ve had on my to-do list for a couple of years, I didn’t realize other people were waiting for something similar.
2 Likes
I just did it for Gaspar Hernandez, Dominican Republic. Clearly not a very heavily iNatted area, beause the number one species, Passiflora intricata, has only 14 observations there, and by the time I got to the bottom of the list, they were species with 3 observations. That likely explains why I have observed 24 of the top 100, just one short of one-fourth.
Switching to the top 200 (which includes many more species with only 3 observations before getting into those with 2 observations), my percentage is only slightly lower: 21% (41 of 200). Switching to the top 500, I find that I have the sole G.H. observation of 33 species.
If I included species that I have seen, but not made observations for, I believe that I would have most of them. I’ll have to get cracking on the observations.
2 Likes
Thanks for the contributions @npizzuti! I appreciate it. I already introduced some of the changes to the main tool.
Hey Everyone,
I added some new features with the help of @npizzuti, some of the features:
- Advanced options to filter for wild only, research grade, and threatened
- Search for Taxon ID so you can specify which taxon you want
- Option to use all your observations instead of only the observations on that specific location
- Location search (search for name or ID)
- Labels for Endemic, Invasive, and Threatened
Thanks for the feedback!
3 Likes
That would be awesome! I can’t wait!
Oh ok, thanks! .. it would be great if it said “Search by Place ID”. Also sorry to be that person, but how do you find a place ID? Ideally I want the “South west of Western Australia” which is more of a region.
There’s an option to search by location name now, you can search by “Southwest of Western Australia”
Wow, this is amazing. I’m at 70% for Ohio. Of the ones I am missing, 20 are plants (just not my interest), while 10 are either dragonflies or damselflies (difficult to take photos of them without a decent camera).
I will bookmark this page to see whether I can knock a few more out this year. There are some easy ones that I am surprised I haven’t submitted before (poison ivy, Virginia creeper, American sycamore).
Oh, you might want to tweak how counties show in the search bar. I wanted to check Erie County, Ohio. However, when I type in ‘Erie’ there are three Erie options showing - likely Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.