Obscuring Poached Species

[sarahb...@trentu.ca]

I know that species that are listed at threatened are automatically obscured, however, this doesn't always cover all the species in an area that are commonly poached. I'm wondering if it's possible to have certain species listed by curators as "commonly poached" or something, which would automatically obscure those species locations and the date observed. Things like Wild Leeks (Allium tricoccum) which are not listed as at risk in Ontario, but which are commonly poached, and I have personally seen entire areas ripped up by overzealous foragers.

Obscuring the date would have more to do with the nature of the problem, making it to easy for poachers to find these locations. The reality is that if you observe multiple things on the same day, any poacher could theoretically go into your observations and look around that date/time and see "Oh, they were in this woodlot/wetland/whatever that day" and be able to go there and find it.

I know we want to share information with other naturalists, but certain species are maybe best kept secret. I still support projects like NHIC and things having access to those data, but I'm getting increasingly wary of who may be using iNaturalist not for it's intended purposes.

Certain species as well, (Spotted Turtle, Spiny Softshell Turtle, Wood Turtle) I would advocate for a province/state wide obscuring on the individual. They are well known to be heavily targeted by poachers, poachers who have shown up at scientific conferences to try and get new location information from researchers about study sites. They are all three already automatically obscured to a degree, but I would support their obscuring to go one step further to include obscuring the date as well, and be more vague about the locations.

Maybe I'm becoming a bit more pessimistic. Thoughts?

[Charlie Hohn]

Theres been a lot of discussion about it and it’s a hard balance because when there’s not risk the spatial data is so incredibly valuable. I think the bottom line is that the auto obscure needs to be paired with an outreach and communication component about geoprivacy and poaching for those few species at highest risk. 

We obscured ginseng in Vermont even though it’s only s3 which isn’t very rare for this very reason. Such might be justified for wild ramps as well. Personally I always obscure or skip posting ramps. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "iNaturalist" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to inaturalist...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to inatu...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/inaturalist.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Sent from Gmail Mobile

[Chris Vynbos]

Locations being secret doesn't necessarily equate to greater protection for a species. Poachers would rather locations aren't shared as then they can harvest without drawing attention. The more endangered a sp the more you need the 'good' people to be aware of their locations to help with the monitoring. But how can you share data without the 'bad' people getting hold of it? Obscuring locations prevents the right people from knowing precise locations, and yet there are easy ways for the wrong people to deduce locations from the available information. It's such a vexing problem and I don't think there are an easy solutions. 

[Charlie Hohn]

yeah i have wondered about that too Chris? Really in an ideal world there'd just be more enforcement of poaching laws and for those poachers driven by desperation... well, less desperation. There's certianly an argument to be made that poachers know their species better than others and populations vanish anyway only no one even knows they were there. The thing is, people have lots of opinions on this but I don't think there is really any data to say either way. I think there was a case where a scientific paper was published about a new reptile species and then collectors appeared in that location looking for them. That's a bit different than this though. I guess people are just extra cautious because we don't know and no one on iNat wants to harm species populations.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to inaturalist+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to inatu...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/inaturalist.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

============================
Charlie Hohn
Montpelier, Vermont