When adding a species to iNat, I realised it is not listed as Vulnerable on the site, although it is Vulnerable in Australia, NSW and QLD.
This is the species; https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/25244117 …and my observation.
I was wondering why it isn’t showing as Vulnerable and if it should be then who might I contact to ask for the species details to be amended?
Thanks in advance, Terri
current flag for this:
https://inaturalist.org/flags/366410
Conservations statuses have to be updated manually so some get overlooked or fall out of date. I found the current status listing on the government site and updated the status to vulnerable to reflect that.
I did the same at the same time. :) [I fixed the duplication.]
Something for inat staff: For the “Authority” field you can only select an entry from the list. Are those authorities in the list something that inat “subscribes” to in some way and there is an auto update (but what’s the point of doing it manually then too). Is there any way to easily import the lists from the government web site? [I guess this will be done with ALA integration.]
http://www.environment.gov.au/cgi-bin/sprat/public/sprat.pl
Thanks everyone. All resolved now. Thanks to the community here for that. After I put up this topic a member directed me on my observation towards the species page and where I can flag it for a data fix. Thanks Joe for updating this one and also macadamia integrifolia. And thanks to anybody else who tried to action it but got beaten to it by Joe.
Also wondering, what about species that have protection at a State legislative level, but not Federal? For example, in Queensland it is the Nature Conservation Act (Federal protection is the EPBC Act).
@rivervalleybird There isn’t much on it in the guide for curators really (that I could find) and I’m newish to it, though most my curation has involved conservation status updates, but here is my take:
Multiple conservation statuses can be added by different authorities, but it’s more often done for special reasons or when local areas treat populations at higher risk. Such as if the state listed it as Near Threatened, instead of Vulnerable. Then a separate conservation status could be added to classify observations in only that state as Near Threatened per the state authority. But as it stands the state is in agreement of vulnerable which is covered under the blanket of the federal conservation status in place which diminishes the need for further conservations statuses. Particularly in this case I feel it may muddy things up as there isn’t a way to select those governing bodies as an authority to go along with the status at the moment.
I agree.
Doing State protection status when the species is not also Federally protected could end up getting too difficult to administer on iNat.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.