There are lots of amazing things to see in the wilds of Alaska!
2 Likes
Great point. But itās also impossible to study. Thereās no way to know for sure whether an observation in a spot was taken by someone who lives in state or not. You might be able to guess a userās home location based on their data but itās a guess, and too difficult to do for every observer.
1 Like
Iāve made some maps for Africa (I included both the purple-green scale and white-blue scale because the white-blue one is easier on my eyes and the purple-green follows the theme of this thread):
Interesting to see Algeria pop up in the second graph
EDIT: hereās the google sheet data since my tables on here seem to break
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BZk-HL_q3KQvj7AjjRu21wAb3wLh_t88Go-eczB66F0/edit?usp=sharing
4 Likes
Even more interesting to see Benin as a clear outlier in its region. Why might this be so?
1 Like
wow ! I didnāt think we (Quebec) would be so low ! we got our work cut out for us x)
3 Likes
a non linear color gradient would be a better visualization of the data
Looking at the observer list for Benin to see who has the most observations, it seems there are 5 institutional accounts as well as a number of individual accounts by power users.
The numbers for Gambia, meanwhile, are being driven by one Peace Corps volunteer stationed there.
3 Likes
New Caledonia is not a department, but it is part of France. It has a very active naturalist community with 147613 observations (22/01/2025) for 268 500 inhabitants (ISEE 01/01/2023).
I also remember seeing quite a lot about Benin when looking for online Coleoptera collections in Africa. It seems like Benin is pretty big into researching their natural surroundings, which may lead to more iNat observations.
1 Like
So interesting! But Gambia is not listed in the Google Sheets data.
Gambia is under its official name, āThe Gambiaā
2 Likes
Algeria, and North Africa have active identifiers. That encourages more observers and more observations.
To the original question - was your ā¦ a slacker - @bobmcd has a project for that
https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/low-growth-countries-and-territories
if any of you would like to help ID and encourage your chosen place?
3 Likes
Benin has a program Masters in Biodiversity Informatics. Maybe that has some contribution.
1 Like
Well, Iām doing my best for Colorado; Iām way above the average per user of 21.7.
Iām guessing that part of the reason that Colorado ranks so low (despite the efforts of a couple of superusers that I can think of) is the way much of Coloradoās outdoor culture takes shape. Mountain biking and downhill skiing donāt exactly lend themselves to photography. Hiking is is a popular activity, but many folks hike as a way to get to someplace, rather than to see whatās along the trail. (And donāt even get me started on the number of trails that we poor bipeds have to share with the aforementioned mountain bikes.)
Add in school projects and random vacation photos of trees, and the discrepancy between verifiable observations (392,557) and average per user starts to look a little less weird.
(I also find it amusing that my birth state of Kentucky is right below Colorado in average observations per user at 21.6, despite having significantly less in the way of both observers and observations. Iām torn between pride in my original home, and embarrassment for my adopted one.) 
2 Likes
I wonder what sort of correlation there is between biodiverstity, iNat observations and agricultural land use. I might hypothesize that broad-acre cropping has poor biodiversity, open range ranching is better and mixed agriculture is the best.
2 Likes
@bradleyallf started another great discussion on possible correlations here - definitely worth a read if you havenāt seen it! https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/what-predicts-your-states-inaturalist-participation-rate/60714
@dgwdoesthings has linked to some really awesome plant maps over there, too!
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/what-predicts-your-states-inaturalist-participation-rate/60714/28
2 Likes
I am aware this is not very robust (scientifically) and probably strongly correlates with user activities in a certain region, but Iād like to see a similar display for biodiversity: species observed per capita.
I would think densely populated regions would have even more ādisadvantagesā here
1 Like
Thanks!
I think itās because we have so much forested land and so many farms too. But Iām sure if they did this by county it would show most observations are from a handful of counties.
1 Like