Two of my chronologically oldest observations (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/36278169 https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/36278168) were uploaded yesterday (marine fish being sold by a fishmonger many miles inland). I put the area where they were being sold as their locality, and initially they showed up fine on the map seen at the pages for their taxa. However, it was recommended that I move their locality to where they were originally collected, so I moved their locality to a general estimation of where they would have most likely been caught. However, since the move they do not show up on their taxon maps for unknown reasons (this is especially evident with the guitarfish). Why might this be happening?
I think you need to reduce your accuracy from 100km radius to something smaller, but I stand to be corrected.
I decreased the accuracy, but they’re still not showing up.
But in general, what do I do in cases like this where a fish is being sold in a faraway area and I don’t have any knowledge of its original locality? I’m assuming that these were caught at a nearby beach because they were being sold by the side of the road with no signs of coolers or anything that might preserve them for being transported long distances, but there are larger fish markets in the general area that do transport fishes over long distances, and it’s entirely possible that these fishes may have been purchased from there and then re-sold by the roadside.
You can only give the location where you saw the fish for sale. Guessing where they were caught seems futile?
I can? Interesting, given that I was recommended by @clinton to move the location to where it was caught. But I’ll move it back to the original site anyways.
I can only speak for myself - I can’t see the value of guessing a place?
Your observation, is, where it happens. If you were using a camera with GPS it would show ‘the point of sale’.
If mapped at the point of sale it should be marked as not wild.
Okay, thanks! However, in the case of the guitarfish, it’s an extremely little-known species that has never been posted on iNat before and has very few online images, and I personally don’t want to banish it to casual because I didn’t know the original locality. Is there any way I can mark it as not wild but allow the observation to retain its significance?
Hmm. Well, If you don’t know the location, there’s no way to get it to research grade without adding incorrect information. I know oceanic organisms work a bit differently than on land and this has come up before but I’m not sure it really should be research grade. Casual observations aren’t removed from the database but it’s true they don’t display on most maps.
Okay, thanks! For now, I’ll just share it with the IUCN and also keep it as the image for the species profile, but change the category to Not Wild.
Actually, I’ve looked up some articles about fish markets in the area where this was being sold, and they indicate that their source fisheries do largely originate from the surrounding coastal districts (i.e.this article mentions that the fisheries largely originate from the surrounding Nagapattinam and Pudukkottai districts). I’ve accordingly moved the locality back to the original coastal site, with a large radius of uncertainty.