Thanks for investigating this. Toward the end of this other thread https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/geoprivacy-obscuring-and-auto-obscure-discussion/457, we were coming to the conclusion that it is showing up in Placer County because the accuracy circle is 110 km, before the obscuring. So I was thinking the huge accuracy circle is what is causing it to end up on the Placer County checklist. I also think the checklist entry was added automatically by the system, but based on the original location and the large accuracy circle as well as the random obscuration point. I don’t understand why, given that the point is gone, Placer County is still highlighted on the taxon map, or how that interrelates with the checklist. If the large accuracy circle is the reason, then maybe checklists could be made to not include those observations with very large accuracy circles and the maps could be made not to highlight the area they fell in?