INaturalist provides an extreme amount of information about living beings worldwide.
I am just curious if these data-treasure have been used by you for personal decision as where to live, official administrative procedures and juridical trials. And have these datas been accepted?
There was a thread about moving to Canada. Where shall I go? But that was feedback from Forum users. And a few about - holiday to … where should I go for iNatting.
I do use inat to decide where to travel, either to find lifer species, or to fill in blank areas.
I’m not sure exactly what sorts of things you are thinking of. Can you explain?
In some contexts, photographic evidence of an organism may not be considered enough for legal action – e.g., for designating protected status for a site, some government bodies may require a physical specimen or more detailed documentation (for example, confirmation on location by someone hired to do environmental assessments etc.). I imagine this also depends somewhat on the species in question and how difficult it is to reliably ID from photos, as well as the particular local laws.
You got my intension right, spiphany. I wonder if the datas from iNaturalist have been used personally in matters of administration or before courts. For instance if somebody had argued that a certain region should become a Natural protection area. Or some certain parts of the city lets say a meadow should not given free for house constructions because that would destroy the living space of a certain species..
Many thousands of peer-reviewed research papers cite iNaturalist data in their sources, and it would be shocking if courts/authorities didn’t accept such papers as evidence. For sure, many of these papers have gone on to be used to justify the creation of protected areas and suchlike.
Raw iNaturalist data presented directly will not have the same weight as a peer-reviewed paper, but could still be compelling, especially if it involves many data points submitted by numerous observers across an extended time period. (Exactly which courts will accept what kinds of evidence for what purposes will be nuanced question with different answers in different jurisdictions.)
There is a case going on in my community in the UK about a right of way. There is a path that the landowner wants to close and build on, while locals are saying that he cannot because it is a legal right of way established by decades of use. Local authorities appealed to nearby residents to say how long they have been using that path and how often, with any photos or other evidence if possible. It occurred to me that I could submit evidence from my prior iNat observations that I have frequented that path over ~15 years. Obviously in this case we are not trying to prove ecological diversity but just the mere public usage of a path, but the fact that the authorities are accepting any kind of evidence (even including unsupported claims in writing from residents saying they have used it for x number of years) suggests to me that the answer is that, yes, absolutely iNat evidence could count as part of a body of supporting evidence in a legal claim.
At first I thought you meant iNaturalist data being used like in a criminal investigation. I have always said iNaturalist is my best alibi as I can always show I was out on the trail!
I set up an iNaturalist project for a friend of mine to help document her efforts to convert her former agricultural land (sheep) to wildlife management land so she can keep her low property tax rate. Texas Wildlife Exemptions Explained
See some discussion here:
I definitely use Inat to decide where I want to travel. I hope people will use Inat data to see where endangered species are located, making sure to develop away from their habitat instead of inside it.
@janetwright you trying to hide something…?
any one can fake metadata in pictures.
You can’t fake upload time though!
true, but upload time and observation time on a trail may is not the same.
People can observe offline and upload it a week later, but use the observation time one week before the upload time
iNaturalist was used in a high profile triple murder case here in Australia where the murder weapon was death cap mushrooms that the prosecution alleged were located using iNaturalist. The verdict was guilty and effectively the punishment was life imprisonment.
As Chris pointed out, this related thread is worth a read:
Sam did exactly what (I think) you are suggesting:
“Sam Kieschnick, the Texas Parks and Wildlife urban biologist who helped document the more than 1,000 species of flora and fauna that have been observed at the site, said he was thrilled at the outcome.”
iNat observations are the preferred way to motivate for parks to be added to the “no mow” list in Cape Town. There is an application process. Some observations I posted have also helped to motivate for an important wetland area to be listed as a “Critical Biodiversity Area” which has implications for future land use decisions.
Hello folks! I am curious if I can motivate some other iNatters for a statement, sharing their nature protection activities!
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
