Guidelines on minimum Observation Standards

I think this based on an incorrect premise that the spectrogram is somehow less real than an audio file. The audio file is not audio. It too is just bytes, simply in a different format. Both formats encode, compress, and transform the original analog signal, merely in different ways. Some spectrogram pictures and WAV recordings provide sufficient evidence to ID something to species. Some don’t. But you can’t simply look at the format and rule out the evidence.


The biggest problem with photos of computer screens is that it frequently means the date and location are for where the photo-of-a-photo was taken, rather than where the original photo was taken. I can usually make a guess at it, but I typically post a question. I don’t get responses very often.


In most cases it depends on the species.
In general:

  • it should be identifiable,
  • its wild/non wild status should be easily evaluated,
  • its position should have, at least, the minimum acceptable precision in relation to the place of observation.