Ideas for a revamped Explore/Observations Search Page

I think we misunderstood.

My remark is only about the case with only 1 observation found as the result of a search.

  1. For sure, generating a direct link to this observation is less ressource consuming than generating a page that contains a link to the same observation. (Anyway the server has to generate at least a link, and I say that it is enough, the server should not do more, as it does now unfortunately).
  2. Moreover, this useless intermediate page has a performance issue.

It is impossible that the current behavior is less ressource consuming for the server.
Because what I suggest is stricly less than what is presently done.

1 Like

The current search wizard allows to sort the obtained results after date added, date observed or favorites.
Would it be possible to sort according to automatic IDs ? I am pretty sure a covariance matrix (or some set of parameters) is stored with each observation, isn’t it?

Alternatively, it would be cool to search (instead of headline taxon) for the same taxon, but in the automatic IDs of a photo. That is, I search for “Noctua pronuba” and get all photos, where the automatic ID has a high probability for N.pronuba, regardless of what the headline says.

Such a thing would be very helpful for us identifyers, because many nice observations are “unknown”, at a very generic taxon or wrongly identified. Sometimes, I would like to search everything which looks similar to a certain genus or species. As it is now, I can only do this for the correctly identified observations…


Copied from original post since it seems to belong here, “There is a filter for “introduced to (geographical region)” but not native species. For example, say the state of California has been selected, and you have searched for “grasses” as a taxon. Since there are a lot of introduced species as well as native species, it would be nice to be able to search for exclusively native species, as well as introduced species. Not sure how plausible this feature would be but I believe this could be a useful feature for the site.”


What about feature we have on id tab, when you click on number of photos of obs, and they are opened inside the box of the first photo instead of opening the opservation?

1 Like

It would be really nice of the search filter options were expanded to include Endemic.

Given that “Introduced” is already an option it seems like an oversight to not include Endemic.


Are you looking for endemic species or observations of endemic species?


In this case, given that it’s a request for a filter option, it would be observations of endemic species.

That said, lists would be good too.

Being able to filter observations this was would also help us update iNat info to be more accurate. In my area (limestone island ecosystem in SE Asia), there are a lot of endemic species, but many of them are not marked as such. It would help us fill in gaps in both labeling and observations, and having averified list of observed endemics also helps us push the National Park and provincial politicians we work with for stronger and more effective protective and conservation efforts.


Are you referring to the Explore page?

Yes, it would be good to have it added directly under “introduced”


(just a quick note that I moved a few of the posts above from a separate topic)

I’ve noticed the omission of endemic in the project filter options as well… We have an NZ Endemic Spiders project that they have to build by manually adding taxa to the criteria for the project, and when I am creating a project I note that I can choose native or introduced as a criteria, and wouldn’t it be cool to be able to do that with endemic as well!

From the New Projects page, having chosen collection:


To make matters worse, Bulk editing the accuracy doesn’t always work, for some reason, despite trying various methods including entering 0 and applying,so I sometimes have to do them individually.

Very much so! I would like to be able to search using that filter as well.

I think it would be awesome to have a user-friendly way of looking for species you haven’t observed. I can type out the link that would acquire what I desire (shown below) but the typing it out is rather time consuming. I’m currently using the link to track down species observed in my county that I’ve never seen before.


there’s a map view, a grid view, and a list view… i wonder if there could be a calendar view (which could then replace a user’s observation calendar)? alternatively, maybe a histogram bar chart with days across the x axis and click to zoom in on a day? maybe this could be integrated with the date filters so that whatever you select in the calendar or bar chart gets applied to the overall Explore filters (and could be cleared, too)?


This would be great!

Another feature of the current calendar that I’d like to have on the explore page is the “Life list firsts” section (although maybe not using lists)


In the “Species” view, if there is only one observation found for a species, then the link “1 observation” should directly open the observation.

Please, do it… To spare the user’s time (and server resources).

1 Like

The web site supports viewing lists of observations by radius like this:

However, there is no way to do something like this with the user interface; you have to construct a URL by hand.

Make this much easier for users by adding lat, long, radius to the search options on the observations page. This could be instead of, or as an alternative to, the current SW lat, SW long, NE lat, NE long. It would allow someone to easily refine or broaden their search area by just changing the radius and clicking search again.


@bouteloua, this is frustrating. Instead of an individual very specific feature request people could see and vote on, you’ve turned this into a comment hidden in a very long comment thread. Why?

Hi @cos, it’s mentioned in the pinned topic in #feature-requests :

Feel free to use the #forum-feedback category as well. The staff and volunteer moderator team is always open to constructive feedback. Thanks!