Old observations with low location accuracy

[Andy Kleinhesselink]

Hey I'm looking for a best practices suggestion for entering 10 year old photos I have (mostly of butterflies) that are not individually geotagged.  I know the location of some to within 1 km, others to within about 10 km.  

Should I not enter them? (if so how inaccurate is too inaccurate to enter?)

Should I crank up location error and submit my best guess for the observations? 

Should I submit but check the annotation for location is not accurate? (if so, is there an agreed upon cutoff on this?)

I'm sure this has been discussed extensively here before, but I wasn't sure what to search for and didn't find a conclusive answer.   Feel free to direct me to a thread. 

Thanks! 

Andy 

[Mark Tutty]

If you can get them to within 10km I would think that is fine. I reckon better to err on the side of caution, so you could crank it up a bit to make sure it covers where it actually was. Where you have no certainty that it is in the accuracy radius, THEN set the location inaccurate. I assume you will have date from timestamp on photos?

 

cheers
Mark Tutty
kiwif...@gmail.com

--
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.

 

[Charlie Hohn]

if you do add them please use the large uncertainty circle. I have mixed feelings about this sort of thing - i've done it a few times... but the range maps and such do a poor job of representing immprecise observations at a glance. If they are really imprecise they are excluded from the map but i think it has to be like 30 km for that to happen.

In short though, it's not against the rules and there are plenty of others like that so it's fine. A note can be good too. Also,if they are an animal which roams a lot it matters less than if it's a plant. 

--

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

[Cliff Tyllick]

Charlie, I haven’t even tried so please excuse my ignorance, but is it possible for people who want to screen out imprecise locations in a range map to filter it by uncertainty? If so, then there would seem to be absolutely no detriment to reporting imprecisely located observations.

Cliff

@baldeagle

Sent from my iPhone

Although its spellcheck often saves me, all goofs in sent messages are its fault.

[Charlie Hohn]

unfortunately there isn't at the current time, that i am aware of. I think there was supposed to be someday.