i looked at some of your observations, and it looks to me that most of them are fairly well identified. things that aren’t identified at a species level seem to be things that probably can’t be identified to species with high confidence based on what’s provided – at least not by most mere mortals. unfortunately, iNaturalist isn’t blessed with magic beyond the community of identifiers and computer vision.
i’ve found that the way to get things identified better is to learn how to identify some of your own observations. that way, you’ll know what you need to capture in future observations so that they’ll have a better chance of getting more specific identifications. you can also search the forum for the many previous discussions on how to get things identified.
over the last 4 months, the percentage of needs ID vs verifiable observations has gone down across all “iconic taxa” groups, even while >3 million observations have been added over that period. here’s a snapshot from October 21, 2019, along with a link to generate the latest numbers: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/recruiting-more-identifiers/2388/294.
these are the current stats for the original poster:
