I am the creator and sole admin of the project. I also created the geographical location (within iNat) it covers. The observations fall well within the boundary of the project location, and they are not an obscured-location species. The observations fall within all project parameters (animal, within project location, any data quality, any media type, any establishment means, any date observed). That one observation that is showing up bears this out.
I don’t know if this is a genuine bug or operator error on my part. But I’m going a little mad being unable to fix it so would appreciate a second set of eyes and brains to figure out which bit isn’t working as it should to join these observations with this project!
It is because your records are obscured, and these are not included in most projects as an intentional design choice to prevent users reverse engineering the exact location of vulnerable taxa.
The one appears in your project because being currently at genus, not species level, it is not obscured at this point.
I did read it prior to making my post. The fact they’re obscured passed me by as there’s nothing on my own record to indicate it would be obscured to others.
And I didn’t anticipate the common yabby (Cherax destructor) would ever be an obscured species as it’s an introduced and invasive species in this state its not vulnerable at all (the linked Wikipedia article also mentions this). The smooth marron is not listed on iNat as vulnerable, its ‘Least Concern’ (the irony, as it is under threat).
Just checked and the IUCN Red List entry for Cherax destructor hasn’t been updated in 24 years! They live in every farm dam in the nation, in addition to wild populations. They’re abundant. It looks like what’s really keeping my observations out of this project is a misinformed vulnerability status.
That is a very obscure way of denoting an obscured record that’s not obscure to anyone else because its simply and clearly labelled as Obscured! Welp, thanks for pointing it out.
For everyone else it is obscured, usually any species which has CR or VU status will have hidden coordinates, when you’ll search for all records of the species, you will see it, when you open an observation you’re shown both true and public coordinates-dots.
If you find taxa that don’t seem to have a reasonable conservation status and/or geoprivacy setting, you can flag for discussion. I would think in this case, you could cite https://www.nativefish.asn.au/home/page/Yabby as pretty good reason to not obscure this species.
