Why does marking "No, it's as good as it can be" make a family-level ID casual?

[jwidness]

@dan_johnson

This seems to make the observation Casual. I don’t understand why this should be. It’s perfectly good evidence of the family.

Staff decided over a decade ago that family would be the cutoff for RG/sending to GBIF:

I think a main disadvantage is that the Rank cutoffs are somewhat arbitrary, but are in align with Donald Hobern’s advice on what is useful to GBIF.

Anyone getting data directly from iNat is still welcome to use family-level data, it’s just not getting sent to GBIF.

@dan_johnson

I’d think it would be useful to include in the CV model for identifying the family. Does this mean it is not included?

This is incorrect, Casual observations can be used to train the CV, see here for more details.

@DianaStuder

I think it has to be Genus to make it RG ?

Anything subfamily and finer can go to RG.