Southwestern Region 2019 Citizen Science Project's Journal

In order to dig into the term and concept, let’s start with everyone’s favorite source…Wikipedia. The Wikipedia Biodiversity page states that the term “biological diversity” was first used in 1916, in a Scientific American article by J. Arthur Harris. It also states that E.O. Wilson claimed that the term was shortened to “biodiversity” by Walter G. Rosen. So, it has been in use for some time. On the surface, biodiversity seems a rather straightforward concept. Again, from Wikipedia, it refers to the “variety and variability” of organisms in the world.

Biodiversity, both the term and the concept, is value-rich. Different people see it differently, depending on personal values. Different human perspectives create different interpretations. There is a humanistic perspective to biodiversity, and it has a set of interpretations. As well, the scientific perspective has its set of interpretations.

In this blog entry, I will consider very briefly biodiversity from a values-based perspective. This perspective tends to be subjective. It might be embodied by personal non-technical experiences and by presentations in popular and news media, and other non-technical specialist resources, such as conservation organization literature. I begin here because it is in this context that I first came to the term, many years ago. I think it is possible to consider biodiversity entirely from the non-scientific perspective, creating a very strong opinion on biodiversity, while giving little effort to learning the scientific foundations upon which the “higher-end” humanistic perspectives depend.

One can look at biodiversity from the values-based perspective of a collector. This is perhaps the simplest interpretation. In this sense, the term can refer to the individual’s personal tastes in organisms. Biodiversity, in this sense, is very vague. Sentences like “I enjoy going to a zoo to see all the different animals,” “My child is really into biodiversity. He collects all those little plastic animals of bears and lions and horses.” From the perspective of iNaturalist, it is entirely possible to be involved in biodiversity data collection projects and have this perspective and know nothing of any other perspective. “I use iNaturalist to look at all the different animals in the world.” “I am really into cacti, and iNaturalist has a great global collection of cacti.” Here, an individual’s personal preferences for a collection is of greatest importance.

One also can look at biodiversity form the perspective of public communications. Biodiversity has a news and popular media presence, along with other biology topics, such as genetically modified organisms. When thinking of biodiversity from this perspective, we need to think about the intentions of the users of the term. The intentions might be to induce a certain behavior in the information consumer, for socio-political, market, or other reasons.

Often in these cases, there is an implication of danger, a warning, which has the potential to create an emotional response in the information consumer, thus, potentially modifying behavior. There are numerous terms, such as biodiversity loss, biodiversity crisis, the 6th mass extinction, and so forth, that are included in these presentations of biodiversity. Depending on the source of the information, this biodiversity perspective might present a plea. “Why doesn’t somebody do something?” And often there is some finger pointing at corrupt politicians, disinterested worker bees and youth more interested in social media.

I want to look at the loss concept a bit. What is it to lose biodiversity? With biodiversity loss comes loss of intangibles. These potentially include moral/ethical and aesthetic things. One implication is that when we lose biodiversity, our morality is correspondingly decreased by some amount. We all want to be moral, right? From an aesthetics perspective, biodiversity loss might diminish the beauty of the world. Who among us wants an ugly world?

With biodiversity loss also come loss of tangible things. These potentially include some of the many products which humans already, or could, derive from organisms. Loss of rainforest biodiversity provides a great example. Loss of plant biodiversity in a tropical rainforest might lead to the loss of countless as-of-yet unidentified phytochemicals, medicines, that is. Ethnobotany, the study of human uses of plants, has historically focused on tropical rainforests for researching plants with potential cancer treatment applications. Biodiversity loss, therefore, can lead to loss of human lives. There is a loss of earth systems integrity to consider. As biodiversity is lost, ecosystem services might be diminished, which might lead to a domino effect of negative consequences, including exacerbating global climate change. Again, the tropical rainforests are known to function as carbon-sinks, locations where a large amount of carbon is sequestered.

Regardless of the specific type of loss, the point of biodiversity thinking here is not so much to evaluate biodiversity per se, that is, to consider the variety and variability of life, but to emphasize that biodiversity is important, that biodiversity is decreasing, that biodiversity loss leads to a non-preferred state, or outcome, and that maybe someone should do something to avert those consequences. Generally, when biodiversity is presented in this way, it is so done in a non-technical manner. I think that I have never come across a presentation of biodiversity loss which self-examines from the scientific/quantitative perspective. Mention of decreases is incidental, is secondary to the consequences of the decreases. Conversely, these discussions seem to imply that more biodiversity is better.

I am interested in the foundations of arguments. Setting aside the more simplistic interpretations of biodiversity, upon what is the argument for preventing biodiversity loss, or increasing biodiversity gain, built?

Next, we will begin to get into some nuts and bolts of biodiversity science.

Overview of the Next Three Posts:

iNaturalist is a couple of things. It is “an online social network of people sharing biodiversity information to help each other learn about nature.” It is also “a platform for biodiversity research, where anyone can start up their own science project with a specific purpose and collaborate with other observers.” Regardless, much of the work is done by people that are not professional scientists. One may be motivated only to learn what animals are moving through their neighborhood or local national forest.

However, whether we know it or not, we might be providing research data to a professional level biodiversity research project, or a project which incorporates biodiversity data. From the iNaturalist homepage, “every observation can contribute to biodiversity science.” Indeed, when the observation data that we upload attains "research-grade," it is generally shared with global biodiversity databases, such as the Global Biodiversity Information Facility. This data then can be accessed and used by researchers around the world.

Despite iNaturalist using the term biodiversity in a scientific context, I have been hard-pressed to find it defined on the iNaturalist website. So, in the next several blog entries I want to wade into biodiversity just a wee bit. Bear in mind, I am not an expert. Also, proceed with the understanding that this is a big discipline, and I can only present some aspects of it, and in a very superficial way. I am in no way attempting to be academic. I welcome any comments or input on this topic!

Stay tuned for the next post: The Issue of The Biodiversity Issue

As iNaturalists, we are in the business of experiencing nature and sharing those experiences with our iNaturalist communities. How do we conduct ourselves during our time in the field? And how might our behaviors affect the quality of our experiences and observations? They might depend on the total context of our outing. The locations we select, the time we commit, the degree to which we are specialists or generalists in our interests, our level of relaxation, and so on all contribute to the overall quality of our experiences.

Let’s take a minute to explore a few methods of engaging with the natural world, through which, perhaps, we can increase our odds of being in the right place at the right time.

Control for external dynamics

Groups have properties that can effect our observations. Generally, as groups increase in numbers, group dynamics such as volume and movement increase as well. These increases might limit the types and frequency of high-quality observations. The sources of these dynamics vary. Age can provide challenging dynamics. Hungry or sleepy children will likely let everyone know that they are hungry and sleepy, despite the once in a life time shot of the Chupacabra now in front of us. Pets also introduce challenges to high quality interactions. Off-leash dogs will keep most organisms on alert. And even on leash they will likely pull us this way and that way, perhaps erratically. If we prefer group outings, we might consider maintaining smaller group sizes and agreeing on group dynamics behaviors.

Let go of internal dialogue

Interestingly, the human brain can be a barrier to wildlife observation. We often move through the world running our personal stories on loop. As we move through our selected habitat, we might have a conversation about not seeing enough. We might also have a conversation about making the correct identifications. We might simply be thinking about our jobs, housework, or daughter’s next soccer game. Internal conversations can not only block our perception of what is there, but they can lead to physical behaviors that telegraph our presence and set critters on alert. An internal conversation is not essential to observing. Just as we might control for external noise, such as that made by a group, we might consider quietening our internal chatter.

Allow the body to do its job

The human body is an observation expert. That is, if it is given the opportunity. Turning down the volume on the language can create space for the body’s senses and mind to tune in to one another and work cooperatively. Vision can improve. This does not necessarily mean that we will be any closer to reading the fine print on a contract. However, it might mean that we increase our perception of events we often miss, like a white tail deer’s flicking tail across a meadow at tree line. It might mean that we become aware of the difference in songs of similar bird species. It might mean that odors can now clue us in to the nearby location of a species.

Understand that you are the observer being observed

Many organisms are looking for other organisms. We look for eating, and for not being eaten. We also look so that we can avoid being accidentally smashed. We look for mates. Regardless of the context, other organisms are likely to know of our presence before we know that they know. But we can practice ways to avoid blowing our cover.

Smell like nature
The fibers in our clothing, our bodies and our hair, the products we use to wash these things, the soles of our shoes…each emits numerous odors that stand out to the sensitive. Perfumes, colognes and detergents are loud and announce our presence. We choose to use these products specifically for this reason. Perhaps we would go to a party to stand out, and one way we could do this is with intoxicating aromas that differ from other aromas in the room. But in a natural setting we want to stand in, and one way to do this is to smell as close as possible to our chosen natural area. The first consideration would be to leave the perfume products at home. Keeping a specific outing attire is common, and we can wash this outfit in perfume free detergents. In addition, our body announces our presence. We also don’t want to douse our bodies in perfume heavy soaps. But we do have the option of using nature-approved perfumes. We can cover our dedicated outfit with a commercial scent mask, such as those used by hunters. If the irony of going to Cabelas to blend into nature is too thick, then we can make homemade masks from natural materials, such as pine needles, which we gather from the areas we visit.

Sound like nature
Our daily activities, clothing, modes of transportation and so forth produce sound patterns which stand out in natural areas. Many of us wear synthetic fabrics into natural areas. But these products can interfere with our goals. Many fabrics made of these fibers produce characteristic swishing sounds as we walk. This sound likely stands out against the typical sounds of a natural area and can quickly alert forest creatures to our presence. We might consider deliberately blending into the typical range of sounds in our chosen natural area and a great beginning is our choice of fabrics. We might choose to wear natural fabrics such as cotton and wool which typically do not produce the swish. We might further our practice by committing to other behaviors, such as whispers, very deliberate movements, which tend to produce less sound, and turning off unnecessary devices or turning off their volume settings.

Be invisible
We typically do not worry about our visibility. We move through the world with the assumption that there are few negative consequences to being seen, and that there are numerous positive consequences. One positive to being seen occurs when wearing hunter orange in a forest during hunting seasons. But in context of nature observation, being seen can have liabilities. Objects are visible by many properties, such as edge, orientation, scale, and motion. Natural habitats are rich in these. We sense edges where one object is distinct from another. We distinguish scale and orientation of objects relative to one another: small or big, vertical or horizontal. Scale indicates relative size and relates to orientation. We sense motion when objects with edges and scale and orientation are displaced relative to other objects. We might consider using these properties to our advantage. Solidly colored clothing renders us a large (scale) vertical (orientation) moving (motion) object which certainly announces our presence. Numerous small edges provide hiding places and form the logic of camouflage. Camouflage clothing provides many small edges, mimicking natural edges, and can reduce an organism’s ability to perceive us, even when moving. Slow, deliberate motion also enhances our camouflage effect, as we produce less disturbances, such as moving vegetation and snapping twigs. Verticality affords our species some advantages, but it also has costs other than back pain. Sitting brings several advantages, one of which is to decrease our size. We might consider sitting for hours in one location, perhaps against a nice tree. The tree is camouflage and it is a natural blind. It will obscure our location and will also disguise our size.

Understand the observed

Organisms both use and are habitat, forming relationships with each other. Birds frequent trees and trees frequent bird droppings. Both require water to survive. These relationships exist in different contexts throughout a day, a week, a month, a year. Depending upon this factor, behavior might change. Different calls, at different times of day, might announce different activities in different locations. Bringing this knowledge with us on our outings can help us hone our senses to where we are. It can help us to locate where we want to be. Put simply we might consider Nanci Pelosi’s advice: “organize, don't agonize.”

These are just a few ways to increase the value of the time we spend on our outings. There certainly are many more. If you have any tips and tricks, let us know.

And thanks for reading!

Jeffrey
jeffrey.teague@usda.gov

Welcome to the National Forest System’s Southwestern Region iNaturalist Project page. Here you will find a simple blog about the project, where we will keep you informed of the current status of the project and any other information that is relevant, interesting and fun.

My name is Jeffrey and I am the Americorps Vista Environmental Education Resource Assistant for the National Forest System’s Southwestern Region iNaturalist Citizen Science Project. I began just three short weeks ago, and in that time I have been impressed by the high volume of iNaturalist observations for AZ and NM, and specifically the documentation of the diversity within our National Forests. So to all those reading that have contributed observations, great job guys.

So what is this project?

In 2017, the Kaibab National Forest created its own iNaturalist Citizen Science Project. The purpose of this project was two-fold. Firstly, we saw the unique power of iNaturalist for engaging people in the outdoors, and we wanted to encourage that interaction. Secondly, we recognized that iNaturalist observations have the power to contribute valuable data in service to the Forest Service’s mission of working to healthy forests. These data are a great source of knowing what is out there. We hope that they might eventually assist with complex forest planning tasks.

Our 2017 Kaibab project reached 3099 observations. Happy with the reception of the project. We continued in 2018 with a new Kaibab project, which reached 1833 observations that year. We are continuing in 2019 with a new project, but with expansion in mind. Since the Kaibab is one forest in 11 within the broader Southwestern Region, we created an umbrella project for the region, and we have given each forest within the region its own project. So if you are reading this blog in Prescott, the Prescott National Forest has its own project. If you are reading from Patagonia, the Coronado National Forest has its own project! And let’s not forget NM! You guys are in there too. As of this writing, the Southwestern Region logs 53,872 observations for 2019 between each of the forests!

Our expansion has two main pushes. First, we aim to increase exposure to the project through renewed outreach activities, thereby increasing participation with the project. We will be delivering public presentations, webinars, and other fun events which will be announced well in advance. Second, we will create a toolkit of resources for those participants, such as FS staff and educators, who would like to engage more fully in the projects. The toolkit will contain best practices, protocols, citizen science background information, activity ideas and more.

Well, that is all I have for now.

Please keep an ear out for updates and feel free to drop a line with any comments or suggestions.

Jeffrey
jeffrey.teague@usda.gov