After almost 18 years, I left iNaturalist, the product and organization I helped create. I left because I don't believe the current Leadership team is pointing the product in the right direction, and I don't think they are managing their talented staff in an empathetic or effective way. If you'd like me to continue working on natural history software, support me on Patreon.
Read the full post at https://kueda.net/blog/2026/01/06/why-i-left-inat
We only have a handful of sanicles in the East Bay, but they're not always easy to tell apart. Here's how I distinguish some of the ones that seem to get confused.
S. laciniata only holds on in a few spots in the East Bay Hills, so unless you're there you can pretty safely rule it out, BUT it's totally worth keeping an eye out for in case there are any unknown populations. S. crassicaulis is, of course, in almost every native forest.
| Sanicula crassicaulis | Sanicula laciniata | |
|---|---|---|
|
leaf cross veins |
fractal, incised, giving the leaf a crinkly appearance (c) Carolyn Koehn, some rights reserved (CC BY-NC) |
faint if present at all, leaf looks smooth (c) Paul Barnett, some rights reserved (CC BY-NC) |
| Sanicula bipinnata | Sanicula tuberosa | |
|---|---|---|
|
leaf dissection |
not that much, more like cilantro gone to seed 
(c) queeryecology, some rights reserved (CC BY-NC)
|
very fine, closer to curly parsley 
(c) hmbernard, all rights reserved
|
I don't actually think these two get confused all that frequently, but they can grow in similar rocky habitat and I've gotten excited looking at a plant I thought was saxatilis but was actually tuberosa, so this is here for my own edification.
| Sanicula saxatilis | Sanicula tuberosa | |
|---|---|---|
|
leaf width, veins |
broad enough to see veins (c) Ken-ichi Ueda, some rights reserved (CC BY) |
so narrow you won't notice veins (c) Joseph D Kurtz, some rights reserved (CC BY-NC) |
Tables made with with Distinguished
Bay Area (and California) folks, tomorrow's (Thursday's) 9am PT hour of KQED Forum is going to be about iNat. If you have a good story to tell about your use of iNat, please call or write in! Here are some ways to do so:
866-733-6786
[email protected]
https://www.instagram.com/KQED_Forum/
https://twitter.com/kqedforum
https://www.facebook.com/KQEDForum/
https://discord.com/invite/kqedforum
If you want to listen in there should be a livestream at https://www.kqed.org/forum/. I'll be doing a Q&A in the Discord at 1pm PT
@aniedes asked me what light I was using for https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/136664681, and I don't know, b/c it was @chyroptera's light! What kind of light were you using, Andrea?
I suspect @damontighe and @tiwane can also recommend good UV flashlights.
https://www.meetup.com/iNaturalist-Happy-Hour-SF-East-Bay/events/285399267
We'll be outdoors at Zeitgeist in SF at 5pm. Organized by @kawriver (thanks, Jesse!)
In case anyone's in SF next week and wants to grab a beer: https://www.meetup.com/iNaturalist-Happy-Hour-SF-East-Bay/events/282592785
Zeitgeist has a decent-size outdoors area. Hopefully it won't be too crowded on a Tuesday.
Mostly a note to myself so I don't forget, but today Janet Gawthrop told me Ehrharta erecta became invasive in California because of a research project at UC Berkeley investigating the effects of ploidy on adaptation. Investigating later, I was rather horrified to learn that Ledyard Stebbins intentionally mutated these plants to create tetraploid versions and intentionally planted both diploid and tetraploid plants in the hills above UC Berkeley, in Napa, and near Monterey in a multi-decade study starting in the 1940s. His papers don't seem to mention any kind of containment or eradication strategy, so it seems likely that his efforts led directly to the rather extreme invasion of this plant we have to deal with in coastal CA today. The tetraploids died off, but the diploids flourished.
A note in the 1949 paper suggests it might have already been established on the UC Berkeley campus before the study began:
The artificial autotetraploid of E. erecta, produced from plants spontaneous on the University of California campus, is taller, coarser, and has fewer tillers than its diploid progenitor (Fig. l)
But still, Ledyard, way to screw over vast swaths of California native plants in the name of science.
Anyone in Santa Cruz want to go tidepooling and/or drink beers this Friday? There's an excellent sunset tide, and I keep meaning to try and meet up with iNat folks in Santa Cruz. The low tide is around 4:45pm and sunset is a bit after 5pm, so maybe tentatively meet at Scott Creek parking lot around 3, maybe shoot for beers somewhere in Santa Cruz around 6-8? Not sure where would be good for the latter. Is Whale City in Davenport cool? If not, how about Santa Cruz Mountain Brewing?Let's do Humble Sea instead (by popular demand)
Let's see, Santa Cruz folks include... @leptonia, @nmcnear, @andym, @jmaughn, @lemurdillo, @ldjaffe, @allisonjgong, @vivienneo, @byersconspiracy, @asjones. Maybe @biosam (not sure if you're still in the area)? @sea-kangaroo, any interest?
Also, if anyone knows, does the creek require fording at the moment?
In case this reaches anyone, here's the info on Meetup: https://www.meetup.com/iNaturalist-Happy-Hour-SF-East-Bay/events/265243031/
Folks who have requested a tag in the past: @birdingman, @clem, @marionanoiram, @morganstickrod
Santa Barbarians, I'm going to be driving down to the Southern California Botanist's Symposium in Claremont this coming Friday. At some point I believe @serpophaga recommended that we do some kind of iNat happy hour event at Night Lizard Brewing Company, which is sort of on the way down. Would anyone be interested in doing that, maybe like 6pm on Friday 10/4Thursday 10/3? I could also come down a day earlier and we could do it on Thursday if that works out better for people (which would also mean I wouldn't have to rush off to Claremont the same night).
Let's see, who's down there other than Adam. @stephanomeria of course, and @swpip, @tomleeturner, @matt_g, @jeffgoddard, @zabbey...
