iNat automatically flags observations as not wild when there are at least 10 observations nearby that have been marked as not wild.
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/why-are-my-observations-being-set-to-casual-grade-for-seemingly-no-reason/21610
3 Likes
Are you totally sure itâs wild? Itâs a cut down tree near âparkâ.
This is a wildland park, in the American sense of national parks or state parks which are often nature preserves. Iâd guess it was cut down for trail maintenance.
The current identification on the observation, Maytenus boaria (Maiten Tree), is a native of South America. If that ID is correct, then the plant is at least introduced in this location, and possibly deliberately planted (itâs a County Park after allâŚ). If the latter, then the system indication of not âwildâ was correct. But probably best to let the ID process take its course first, and see if the community ID ends up agreeing.
1 Like
Itâs considered naturalized in California, is recorded to be spreading on its own from previous plantings, and is a potential invasive risk.
Given the location (county park, rural area, not in an urban or suburban area) and that it appears that the majority of the rest of the vegetation there is natural rather than planted, and the small size of the stump, itâs a fair bet that this is a âwildâ one from the naturalized group that self seeded.
1 Like
Short answer is: yes, this is the way that the system is supposed to work. @brennafarrell highlighted some of the criteria for the system automatically flagging these as not wild/naturalized
You can see more info here: https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/help#quality
The relevant section: âThe system will vote that the observation is not wild/naturalized if there are at least 10 other observations of a genus or lower in the smallest county-, state-, or country-equivalent place that contains this observation and 80% or more of those observations have been marked as not wild/naturalized.â
So if you feel that this is a wild individual, youâre free to vote in the DQA section to designate as wild by offsetting the automatic iNat vote with your own. Based on @earthknightâs comments it seems like that vote would be appropriate in this case.
1 Like
Thanks for all the responses. In my humble opinion invalidating an observation without supporting evidence should not be allowed, is there a way to enforce including a reason for invalidating the observation? This has been brought up before in other forum posts. Can more smarts be added to the automatic Inat invalidaton, maybe something like âthis user has 1000 posts they probably know the difference between casual and wildâ? This is probably my own petty problem and one of my many irks, I am having the time of my life with this stupendous tool thanks.
It saves us all from thousands of planted Rosa and other cultivated plants and animals, thereâre users with thousands of observations who never mark any cultivated plants, so numbers donât mean user cares. You do and as an active user Iâm sure you will notice if it will happen next time and even though it is annoying, one vote against system decision overrides it, so click on it and never think again about it.
4 Likes
Just as a side note, if your observation gets a sad, gray âcasualâ label, it doesnât at all mean itâs âinvalidâ. Observations of cultivated plants, or kept animals are just as useful as their wild counterparts. âValidityâ isnât a useful concept here.
5 Likes
Iâm wondering why these observations are being set to casual grade?
They seem perfectly legit to me, and I find tons of observations like them that become research grade. Iâve noticed some correlation between species that are introduced/feral and observations that get set to casual, but if Iâm not wrong introduced species donât need to be set as casual.
here are some examples:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/72394712
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/72316234
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/71454445
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/58247140
iNat automatically flags domestic cats and dogs as ânot wildâ in many areas where wild/feral populations havenât been recorded. If youâre sure they arenât someoneâs pet, you can mark âyesâ next to âorganism is wild?â 
2 Likes
Also, the last one with the plant was marked as captive by a user, likely because it on a table, Iâd guess? Again, you can over-ride that, or @ the user to ask what their rationale was.
Also, see this forum post: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/why-is-this-observation-casual-needs-id-research-grade-official-thread/13186 :)
And this on the help page: * The system will vote that the observation is not wild/naturalized if there are at least 10 other observations of a genus or lower in the smallest county-, state-, or country-equivalent place that contains this observation and 80% or more of those observations have been marked as not wild/naturalized. - https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/help#quality:
1 Like
Thank you! Lol I put the plant on my table so I could take a proper photo of it.
1 Like
next time, try to provide a small description, like âthis cat has no ownerâ or something like that.
5 Likes
You might also check the locations youâve assigned to the observations. Three of the four flagged here seem to be in or just outside of urban yards (if they are accurate) which may possibly have had something to do with the assumption that the organism was ânot wildâ. If the locations are not accurate, you can Edit any observation and manually move the location indicator to the correct spot.
3 Likes
I donât think being inside of a yard has anything to do with it, otherwise we wouldnât get the countless âneeds IDâ domestic cats on laps in houses, or tigers in zoos, etc. Like it says on the help page, âThe system will vote that the observation is not wild/naturalized if there are at least 10 other observations of a genus or lower in the smallest county-, state-, or country-equivalent place that contains this observation and 80% or more of those observations have been marked as not wild/naturalized.â
⌠I wish the system was smart enough to know that a dog in a yard or a cat on a lap was a pet!
I think @je9h was implying that an identifer (not iNat itself) might assume non wild/captive based on the location in an urban yard (though ideally someone doing this would leave a comment as to why they ticked it for captive in the DQA).
3 Likes
Gotcha, I thought they were saying that the program made the decision based on the urban location. The 3 animal (2 domestic cat, 1 domestic dog) that ware marked casual were marked by iNat, not a user, which inevitably leads to confusion because there isnât a comment made by the program!
Yeah, it would be nice if there were some little symbol that said âThe iNat fairy marked thisâ or something like that (and gave a link to the help, etc.).
6 Likes