How to treat old observations after property changes hands

I’m sure this topic has lots of variables, so I’m not asking this in general, I’m asking specifically in my case what your opinion is when answering the poll. But feel free to discuss it in general terms in the comments.

I have been iNatting a small piece of land (~1 acre) belonging to an acquaintance (our parents are friends) for several years now. It’s not contiguous with the rest of her property. She had purchased it when it came up for sale to prevent it from being completely cleared for a house. The previous owner only had a small area cleared to park an RV trailer. The land is adjacent to Watson Rare Native Plant Preserve. Now that the non-profit that owns the preserve has the money, they have started purchasing more land. My acquaintance just sold this piece of land to them. My question is, do you think I should include my old observations from this property in the project for the preserve? Or leave them in their current project which also includes the rest of her property and my mom’s property?

  • leave in old project
  • move to Watson preserve project
0 voters

I don’t think there’s a wrong answer, but it’s great that the preserve has been expanded and that you’re able to provide some historical context from even before it got the land! Also – why not leave it in both projects?

Happy iNatting!

16 Likes

I would probably put them in the Watson Preserve project, as that’s where the land is.

The other project is private land.

2 Likes

If they can be in both projects, that seems like maybe the best answer! If I had to choose, however, I chose the Watson Preserve, because it’s contiguous with that property.

13 Likes

Observations can be in multiple projects so there’s no need to “move” them from one to another. Projects aren’t like folders on a computer to hold files but more like reciprocal links added to the observation pages. You can add them to the new project without any effect on the connection to the old one.

The main question may be that of privacy and whether the locations should be public or obscured. Maybe check with your friend if she still wants these to be in the old project tied to private property. And maybe check with the non-profit if they’d like for locations to be obscured. I know we have some plant preserves in our area where the stewards ask to obscure locations due to the risk of attracting poachers.

12 Likes

I didn’t think about having them in both projects. I’m going to add them to Watson project and ponder whether I want to remove them from my private property project. (I will lose some species)

There is nothing on the new property poach-worthy. But I’m going to leave obscured for now since I’m not sure if the new section is open to the public yet. They may first want to put in some markers to make it clear where the property ends and the next-door-neighbor’s (where there is a house) begins.

4 Likes

Was the nature reserve project created by you, or them?
I would simply ask them. Otherwise, add it to them, since it’s historical data of their current land

1 Like

I didn’t create the preserve’s project, but I am the curator. You’re right, I probably should have asked before I started adding observations.

1 Like

I would talk to the preserve’s NGO - but it seems a wonderful opportunity for them to start with an extra portion of historical data. If they know there is a population of that, there ! And they can ask you if there is more information they need, which you did not record, but do know.

2 Likes

I asked two board members today and they both thought it was a good idea to include the old observations

7 Likes

Observations are not static (frozen) in space and time. They follow, if land borders shift or taxa get re-ordered to a new status.
Evidences (plausibilization) to observations are a static reference related to a state of knowledge, technical capabilite etc. at a given point in time. They only can get amended over time.
In this sense, i’d say the more important part is the current status as part of the watson reserve. It is important to add it there to have it part of the reserve’s ground bio-history.
The old project may however still be of interest to document the evolution prior the merge. Can’t you just add it to the watson reserve project and at the same time freeze/close the “old” project to preserve its final state at hand-over?
As far as i understand, projects in INat are not actual data but data references to observations. Observations can be part of more than one project, so it shouldn’t be either/or. The cost to keep the “old” project references available should be rather low.

1 Like

I’m not getting rid of the old project. It doesn’t only cover the property that was sold. It also includes Miss Willis’ other property (the one her house is on) and my mom’s property (where she and I live).

Thing is, the old project is part of an umbrella that I created that strictly covers privately held land not open to the public. https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/big-thicket-private-property-umbrella

I actually don’t have very many observations from the property she lives on since I have to ask to go over there each time whereas she gave me permission to visit the other one any time I liked. I’m thinking now that I might change the project to cover my mom’s property only.

2 Likes

I’m adding the tag “Willis property historic data” to all the observations I’m moving over to the Watson preserve project.

1 Like

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