Locations

While we are on the point of obscuring locations for animals, and as Tony have mentioned Rhinos, I want to point out something that worries me. I have for this reason removed all my Rhino observations from iNaturalist.

Black Rhino are critically endangered, to the point that National Parks that have these animals do not even put them on their Mammal checklists. However, if you enter Black Rhino on the Explore option and search for them and look at the wider picture of things, I do think it is fairly easy to determine, using iNaturalist, which National Parks have Black Rhino and which don't. If I add all my Black Rhino sightings then I believe it would be even more obvious, by looking at the general area where they have been obscured, to work out from which Park they are and that might lead to poachers then targeting a Park which few people even know have Rhino... Please correct me if I am wrong. But go and see for yourself. All the Black Rhino strongholds are clearly visible on iNaturalist and I don't want them to become more so if I add my observations. I was even contemplating adding them with locations showing them to be anywhere within South Africa but that would defeat the purpose of the data. However, I do think that if iNaturalist do increase the level of obscurity given to an obscured observation, especially critically endangered species, maybe from 22km to 222km then that would help to confuse poachers completely as to where the Rhino could be. Then I would have comfort in adding all my Rhino observations.
christiaan_viljoen commented
3d

@kueda
tonyrebelo commented
3d

Although SANParks have removed rhinos from some parks for some sites, they are still available in all the literature and in archived versions of the sites.
Hiding data that is already out there, or that is obvious, achieves nothing other than a false sense of security for those overly worried, while leaving the animals (and plants!!) just as vulnerable as before.
Meanwhile social media continue to leak locations, available to anyone with even rudimentory data mining skills.
We have to balance risk with safety. We dont want to discover that Rhinos are extinct at Mountain Zebra National Park, because everyone was too scared to record them.
None of this is helped when park rangers and officials are in the pay of the criminal syndicates!
Furthermore, what is the point of hiding your data, when any visitor wanting to earn a few extra dollars, can report sighting directly to the poachers, and indeed poacher informants can visit the parks and map dung and sightings, when some visitors are too scared to report their sightings. It means that conservation authorities and scientists have less access to data, but criminals have more (and esp. so when there are a few corrupt officials).
Sometimes I wonder if the criminal syndicates are not behind the move to obscure and remove data, so that their activities are not noticed by the public. Especially with regard to succulent and bulb trade, where the fewer people are aware of localities, the longer the time to detection when these are poached.
christiaan_viljoen commented
3d

Plants are another matter altogether, because they cannot even run away, and there GPS location will be dead accurate. But the obscure location option works will for plants such. Especially plants that are highly sort after on the collector's (black) market and yet not classified as endangered (so thus not automatically obscured). This, for example, incudes many species Haworthiads. I usually remember to obscure any plant species that I reckon might be appealing to careless collectors.

But Rhino are another matter. You will never get a pin location on a rhino as you would for a plant, but a bunch of pins in the same area would indicate a healthy breeding population which could then be targeted. I don't think that it is necessary to monitor rhino populations using platforms such as iNaturalist. Whereas iNaturalist is ideal for getting good information on populations insects and other small creatures; populations of large mammal species, especially those that are endangered are rigorously monitored by conservationists wherever these animals occur. That is way I suggest that we enlarge, by ten fold, the level of obscurity given to endangered mammal species. It should not be possible to determine where (in which Parks and private game reserves) these animals occur using iNaturalist.
michael2838 commented
3d

@christiaan_viljoen , do poachers often use inaturalist? I normally obscure my locations to a degree since @ludwig_muller told me about this. Since it is not always big game that is poached but often other things to.
tonyrebelo commented
3d

"It should not be possible to determine where (in which Parks and private game reserves) these animals occur"
It is a legal requirement that large mammals need to be fenced with electric and strong fencing. There are only so many places that rhinos are allowed. You can count them on your hands and feet. How will obscuring help? For instance current obscuring shows Mokala as two squares and rhinos are in both. And Addo main shows similarly as two squares. If obscuration where 100 times larger, it would still be 100% apparent that these are from Mokala and Addo!
tonyrebelo commented
3d

" do poachers often use inaturalist? "
poachers are sophisticated: not the grunts who pull the triggers, but the organizers. They use drones, facebook, online literature, auction adverts and everything they can get their hands on. And iNaturalist and other sites. And I will wager a crate of Whiskey, that they have access to SANParks internal files, and monitor ranger radios.

Obscuring Haworthias is probably a bit meaningless, because their are countless popular magazines, websites and blogs for this genus, often with localities in excruiting detail. Many of the species are in common trade, and available worldwide from growers.

Fudging data ("normally obscure my locations to a degree") may result in your "known" population being declared extinct, at least until scientists, conservationists and managers discover that your data are unreliable and thus useless for conservation. Given the issues that might arise from fudging localities, posting incorrect localities (even if only to a degree) is simply unethical. Rather dont bother posting them.

Publicado el febrero 24, 2021 09:12 MAÑANA por ludwig_muller ludwig_muller

Comentarios

No hay comentarios todavía.

Agregar un comentario

Acceder o Crear una cuenta para agregar comentarios.