1 Reply by RobLarge

  • RobLarge
  • RobLarge
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Wiltshire
  • Registered: 15-07-2008
  • Posts: 812

Re: Reporting exclusions

It would be nice to have a facility within the reporting wizard which allows for certain taxa, or lists thereof, to be excluded from the results.

I am still trying to get a satisfactory export of all occurrences of taxa with statuses (which will eventually form a notable records GIS layer). I am depressed by the number of taxa which are reported which are certainly not worth reporting on and probably don't deserve the statuses which recorder assigns them, or which are not notable locally. There are many examples, but things like the Common Centaury, hybrid Bluebell and hybrid Lime are particularly annoying. Another obvious example is Scots Pine, which is undoubtedly notable in its native range, but not in Wiltshire.

As it is I will have to find a way of dealing with this problem, perhaps by fiddling with the SQL somehow, or have to spend hours clearing out the rubbish every time I do the export.

Rob Large
Wildlife Sites Officer
Wiltshire & Swindon Biological Records Centre

RobLarge's Website

2 Reply by burkmarr

  • burkmarr
  • burkmarr
  • FSC BioLinks Digital Development Officer
  • Offline
  • From: Preston Montford
  • Registered: 14-05-2006
  • Posts: 105

Re: Reporting exclusions

Hi Rob and all,

I am in the process of improving the reports we provide when responding to data requests. As part of that we are going to report taxa separately against categories such as 'UK legally protected' and 'notable'. And of course I have come up against the same annoyance as Rob. I have a couple of questions that folk may be able to help me out with…

R6 reports hybrid bluebell as legally protected because it associates it with WACA schedule 8. I couldn't find it on the version of Sched 8 that I located on the web (Naturenet). Does anyone know if it was added in an amendment? What's the story?

I would also like to exclude certain taxa from being reported against certain categories – Rob's example of Scots Pine as notable is a case in point. I can do this within the program I am writing to generate our reports, but I would like to know if anyone has expanded on Rob's example list and would be willing to share?

Best wishes,

Rich

Richard Burkmar
Biodiversity Project Officer
Field Studies Council

burkmarr's Website

3 Reply by MikeWeideli

  • MikeWeideli
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Littlefield Consultancy
  • Registered: 05-07-2006
  • Posts: 2,629

Re: Reporting exclusions

If  what you want to do is to exclude certain taxa completely from certain designations and providing you want to be consistent about this throuhout your reports then you could delete the entries in Index_taxon_Designation. If you did this as a Batch Update, with a csv file holding details of the taxon designation type and the taxa to be excluded  you could apply this immediately after rebuilding Index_taxon_designation. The csv file need to contain just the recommended taxon name and the designation type either as a key or name. An XML report could be used to generate a file for editing.   This appoach would ensure that all reporting, including that done via the Wizard excluded the  designations .  Once set up it would  require very little maintenance. There is no harm in altering Index_taxon_Designation in this way as it is never exported and can be rebuilt back to the default in a few minutes.


Mike

Mike Weideli

MikeWeideli's Website

4 Reply by RobLarge

  • RobLarge
  • RobLarge
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Wiltshire
  • Registered: 15-07-2008
  • Posts: 812

Re: Reporting exclusions

If I recall correctly I got around the problem by creating a new designation called "Wiltshire not notable" which I assign to every non-notable notable species I come across. Then modified the SQL to exclude any records of taxa on this list. Works OK for my custom built query, but obviously doesn't apply to any other queries done e.g. with the wizard

Rob Large
Wildlife Sites Officer
Wiltshire & Swindon Biological Records Centre

RobLarge's Website

5 Reply by charliebarnes (edited by charliebarnes 24-08-2010 10:10:55)

  • charliebarnes
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Greater Lincolnshire
  • Registered: 07-09-2008
  • Posts: 1,384

Re: Reporting exclusions

burkmarr wrote:

R6 reports hybrid bluebell as legally protected because it associates it with WACA schedule 8. I couldn't find it on the version of Sched 8 that I located on the web (Naturenet). Does anyone know if it was added in an amendment? What's the story?

Am I right in thinking Recorder thinks it's designated because hybrid bluebell is a child taxon of bluebell (which is designated)?

Charlie Barnes
Information Officer
Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership

charliebarnes's Website

6 Reply by RobLarge (edited by RobLarge 24-08-2010 14:28:07)

  • RobLarge
  • RobLarge
  • Veteran
  • Offline
  • From: Wiltshire
  • Registered: 15-07-2008
  • Posts: 812

Re: Reporting exclusions

I wondered that. This might also be the explanation for the presence of the hybrid Lime also, although that would be even more ludicrous. The hybrid bluebell usually occurs in association with its parents, this is far from true of Lime trees.

Rob Large
Wildlife Sites Officer
Wiltshire & Swindon Biological Records Centre

RobLarge's Website

7 Reply by burkmarr

  • burkmarr
  • burkmarr
  • FSC BioLinks Digital Development Officer
  • Offline
  • From: Preston Montford
  • Registered: 14-05-2006
  • Posts: 105

Re: Reporting exclusions

Yes I think you are spot on because I just added Bluebell to a locally created LBAP designation using the standard batch update - Assigns taxons to a designation (using rucksack) - and now I find that Recorder is reporting the hybrid against this LBAP designation too. Looks like I will need to implement some sort of workaround such as Mike or Rob recommends.

Richard Burkmar
Biodiversity Project Officer
Field Studies Council

burkmarr's Website