There are many plants that are being poached these days, such as Dudleyas and Salvias. At what point does the iNat community decide that it might be wise to obscure the location of a species by default? Can we do this for species that are not yet officially endangered or threatened?
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/m7jkma/the-white-sage-black-market-v27n3
2 Likes
If you think a species should be obscured by default, the best practice would be to flag it and start a discussion there (not everyone on iNat is on the forum)
7 Likes
This comes up so often that I feel it warrants inclusion in a FAQ somewhere
4 Likes
I concur with @thebeachcomber’s suggestion. Also recommend reading this older thread about the pros and cons of obscuring iNat locations in such circumstances.
Consider whether obscuring locations of iNat observations will significantly hinder the poachers, or whether locations are already easy for them to find without iNaturalist. If the latter is the case, obscuration might actually hinder conservation efforts more than it would help a would-be poacher. (Not saying this is the case for your particular situation – just something to consider.)
5 Likes
Thank you. I will try that.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.