Fish Market Observations Marked Casual

[raymie]

Yes - especially dogs, given that released/escaped dogs have formed wild populations in many places.

[bosqueaaron]

This isn’t very different than posting insects from collections. I see that fairly frequently, and I’m inclined to believe that these types of observations have research grade value.

[bouteloua]

From staff:

@tiwane

iNat’s not really a place to upload collections you didn’t make (maybe GBIF would be better).

And see https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/about

[tracc]

We record fish market observations all the time. We make it clear that it’s a fish market observation and the original catch location is unclear. We set a large geographic observation field. And we value the people that bring our obs to RG who accept that some of these species may never be seen live or in the wild.

59 / 65 elasmobranch species in our state are recorded from a fish market observation. For 8 of them, a fish market photo is the Cover Image for that species, because there in’t anything better.

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?place_id=13134&taxon_id=47273&view=species

For some of them, it’s the only observation on iNat:

Hemigaleus microstoma

If it’s rare, endangered or poorly protected, then that fish market observation, with as much data as you can provide, is valuable science.

[earthknight]

Gonna be difficult to tell where the fish is actually from in a fish market. Some are captive raised, some are wild caught, some in either category are from nearby, and others in either category are from half the planet away and shipped in to the market.

Even if the observation is of a wild caught individual you’re unlikely to be able to mark the correct location.

These are all potential reasons why a fish market observation may be marked as casual.

There are projects specifically aimed at marked species in trade, whether the observation is casual or not. The first link is specifically for fish in markets like you’re describing:

• https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/fisheries-and-fish-markets
• https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/species-in-trade

[upollo]

Ok, here’s an observation in the same general category as this topic:
Link to observation removed my moderator
In this case, the “observer” found a historical photo of a captured crocodile, took a photo of the photo, and posted it on iNat. I tried to reason with them and mark it as casual, but I was overridden by others and it is currently research grade. How do we deal with situations like this?

[earthknight]

That’s more a question for iNat curators and mods as it deals with a historical record rather than an observation by the individual user.

However, putting that into a more useful context, and using one of my own observations:

• https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/9516164

This observation of a Leopard Cat is taken when it was in a cage. However, we confiscated it from poachers and know the original location. In addition, once we ascertained that it was in good condition we released it back into the wild near where it was originally captured.

In this case, even though it was in a cage at the time of the observation we know it came from the wild, and we know when and where it came from.

Going back to the saltie observation you linked, and setting aside the issue of it not being an observation by the poster and questions about the accuracy of the date, it was taken from the wild and the original location (at least close enough) was know, so it should be wild and be eligible for Research grade.

If the original location was not known, then it would likely stay at Casual grade.

[cthawley]

Just a reminder to folks to not post links to observations or users on iNat that could be perceived pejoratively. We don’t want the forum to be a place for calling out other the behavior of other iNat users. It’s often best to just reference general behaviors and situations. Thanks!

[AdamWargon]

@AdamWargon

You have to write a comment that is detailed enough that someone could read it in 10 years, and they would still agree with your “wild” observation. And you have to write that for every observation that you submit, so that it stands on its own, even if no one has ever seen any of your other observations.

I’ve only been involved with iNat for about 4 months, so take everything I say with a grain of salt. It could all be nonsense!

@earthknight

Putting that into a useful context, and using one of my own observations:

• https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/9516164

This observation of a Leopard Cat is taken when it was in a cage. However, we confiscated it from poachers and know the original location. In addition, once we ascertained that it was in good condition, we released it back into the wild near where it was originally captured.

In this case, even though it was in a cage at the time of the observation, we know it came from the wild, and we know when and where it came from.

Links usually don’t get a lot of clicks here on the iNat Forum, but I encourage you to click on the observation that @earthknight shared above, about the Leopard Cat. @earthknight did exactly what I described . . . 6 years ago!

[jasonhernandez74]

@upollo

n this case, the “observer” found a historical photo of a captured crocodile, took a photo of the photo, and posted it on iNat.

Flag it for copyright infringement.

[schizoform]

It’s important not to fetishize ‘research grade’ too much. Good researchers know it’s insufficient for their needs. It just means (more or less) that there’s a community ID with a majority (at least two) in agreement.

[epic2112]

Fish that flops off the table at the fishmarket = wild

Exactly. One has to use a bit of common sense and apply a helpful dose of spirit-of-the-law in order for these guidelines to be useful. Adhering strictly to letter-of-the-law can result in some absurd conclusions for edge cases (and also maybe not-so-edge cases).