Morning Charlie - there are a number of proprietary addins which have not yet been added to the repository but I am following up on this and will let you know how I get on. Also to note that Recorder 6 requires a number of proprietary tools to build it so licences would need to be purchased for these by anyone wishing to develop it. We will provide details in the documentation pending for Github.

I don't know how up to date this list of Recorder 6 steering group members is: http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-4822
Certainly the user group is out of date (and I don't think exists, you are one of the people listed Janet?) http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-4823

Mary – thank  you for communicating JNCC’s position on support for Recorder 6.

I thought I would share some information here regarding where the Local Environmental Record Centre (LERC) community is at, with respect to Recorder 6, in my capacity as Chair of the Association of Local Environmental Record Centres (ALERC).

A significant proportion of LERCs currently rely on Recorder 6 as one of their core data management systems. It is a key piece of software which enables LERCs to provide biodiversity information services to a wide range of different organisations including Local Authorities, many of whom use LERC services to inform the discharge of their section 40 duty under the NERC Act ‘to have regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity’, particularly in a planning and development control context.

While other species data management solutions do exist, migrating from Recorder 6 to an alternative platform is a very major undertaking. As you rightly identify in your statement, Recorder 6 is a mature and stable software package which is capable of storing data in a highly structured form; many LERCs have integrated bespoke reporting systems with Recorder 6 which have been carefully designed to meet local biodiversity information requirements. The Recorder 6 dictionary updates are also a critical feature – ensuring that data managers across the NBN network can work from a single set of standard reference names and use these when sharing data, e.g. on the NBN Atlas. As such, many LERCs take the view that Recorder 6 remains their best option for managing biodiversity data.

March 2018 is not very far away, and many LERCs will be well advanced in their budget setting for 2018-19 with limited scope to accommodate additional budget pressures at this stage. ALERC very much hopes that the possibility of putting some transitional arrangements in place can be fully explored, in order to minimise disruption to Recorder 6 users, the important services they provide, and the functioning of the NBN Network as a whole.

My understanding is that, historically, LERCs have not played a major role in supporting Recorder 6 and I don’t think ALERC is currently represented on the Recorder 6 steering group? As major users of the software, there is an appetite within the LERC community to be more involved in supporting and setting the future direction for Recorder 6. We are keen to continue discussions with the NBN Trust, and JNCC, to look at how we can make that happen.

Earlier this year, mindful that support for Recorder 6 has been decreasing over recent years, the London & South East Record Centres (LaSER) decided to take the initiative and, following a LaSER meeting on 16 August 2017, Sussex Biodiversity Record Centre (SxBRC) and Greenspace Information for Greater London (GiGL) have commissioned Andy Foy to produce a ‘Recorder 6 Consultation’ to gather as much information as possible about who uses Recorder 6, how they use it, what they most like & dislike about it, and how it should be financially supported.

Andy Foy has been working with the ALERC Databases Group (including Ian Egerton and Steve Whitbread) to ensure this consultation is designed appropriately to engage with the whole LERC community and other Recorder 6 users. ALERC will be launching the consultation ahead of the NBN conference and ALERC Director Steve Whitbread, at the NBN conference, will be asking everyone who has an interest in Recorder 6 to please fill it in, so we have a comprehensive set of information which we can use to plan a way forward.

It is anticipated that this Recorder 6 consultation will be followed by a wider consultation (‘part 2’), taking a broader view on LERC’s current and future information management requirements – led by the ALERC Databases Group.

Clearly, JNCC’s decision to cease supporting Recorder 6 is not good news. But I hope we can continue to work together – JNCC, NBNT, ALERC and others in the NBN network – to find a way forward which enables Recorder 6 users to continue doing the important work that they do.

Hi,

Just to expand on what Clare has said,  there will be a 2-part consultation.

Part 1 is most pressing, especially given the position Mary has outlined and will focus very much on Recorder 6. I'll be taking the opportunity to promote this (and Part 2) next week. It would be great for Andy to get a good number of responses back before Christmas.

Part 2 is more about meeting information needs and data handling beyond the next couple of years. Whilst prompted by discussions amongst the East of England LERC Group it will be very much about the needs of the whole spectrum of recorders, recording schemes, record centres and information users across the whole NBN Community, and the first step will be to seek views on exactly what it should cover and sign folk up to developing the consultation accordingly. (The conference would seem to provide an ideal opportunity for this).

Together the two exercises should provide useful information both about the ways in which Recorder 6 is valuable and to how many (in the UK at least), and what is seen to be important in the longer term.

Recorder 6 appealed to me because it offers a wide range of data capture possibilities oustide of the normal species recording. I have made extensive use of the Location features and Location Measurements and it has taken me 5 years to get the data to the point where it can be used, and recently a lot of investment in time on XML reports to be able to report on the data.  I don't think there is  any on line system capable of handling this information. There are very many features in R6 which as far as I know are not in any on line system. JNCC included these in R6, because I assume they were considered as important part of a complete biological recording system, yet there is no mention of the loss of the features in the announcement or any suggestion of  what users of these features should do now Recorder 6 is not being supported. How on earth can this be justified - how much will on line recording be benefiting financially by abandoning R6 support ? Surely R6 support should have continued until alternatives were actually agreed and in place.   Is it worth writing to my MP about this ill considered and poorly justified decision ? 

Dave

I’ve had concerns about the dropping of R6 support for some time, and I assume that extends to the cessation of the retainer which has enabled Mike/Sally/John to provide their excellent advice and technical know-how service to R6 users. I look forward to the consultation arrangements proposed. R6 currently serves our purposes at Doncaster LRC perfectly well and we have a bespoke data management and reporting system designed to work with and around R6 (agreed – the mapping in R6 is slow but we do use it). If we find ourselves in any way pressured into adopting an online system to replace R6, in order to keep abreast of dictionary and designation updates for instance, this could well raise business continuity issues with us, and an alternative, at least as comprehensive as we have now, has to be in place and fully tested before we make any move from R6 to whatever replaces it. We need all the present features now in R6 to be represented in any online system. Clare’s comments of 6/11 are especially comprehensive and to the point.
Anyway, if we’re talking about an “online recording system to replace R6”, what exactly are we talking about ? A web-based “front end”  in which case how will we handle our SQL database? If not what about database security? I’m sure that there will be quite a few questions to be answered.

The link for the Consultation Form can be found here:  https://www.cognitoforms.com/SxBRC/Reco … nsultation

Steve

Can ALL LERCs, NSS and registered purchasers of Recorder (surely JNCC and/or the authorised distributors of Recorder must have their contact details) be explicitly targeted with a request to complete the survey form ??

Steve

Thanks Mike.  Can the other resellers (inc. those who stopped) be asked for names and contact details - even if they are not interested in helping themselves they may be willing to hand over what they have.

Steve

Further to Andy's response, I have also asked ALERC Directors to disseminate information about the Recorder 6 consultation through the regional groups, so I hope this will ensure all LERCs will be made aware - even if they don't visit the online forums.

But basically - anything anyone can do to help spread the word will be much appreciated. Thanks for sharing it with the Dipterists Forum Darwyn.

To contact NSSs, BRC maintains a full list of them at http://www.brc.ac.uk/recording-schemes
NBN's list of Data Partners at https://registry.nbnatlas.org/ also lists many, just those engaged with the Atlas though.
Both may have more comprehensive databases which I'm sure they'd be happy to provide for this task.