1

Topic: iRecord vs NBN Atlas

BRC quote:

It is not very easy to query records via the NBN Atlas

Followed by advocating the use of the iRecord silo (in addition to NBN Atlas)
An old old clash which is inhibiting NBN Atlas uploads.
Which of the two competing systems is preferable?

Where are the documents which state intentions?

2

Re: iRecord vs NBN Atlas

I found one document:

Sutherland WJ, Roy DB, Amano T, 2015. An agenda for the future of biological recording for ecological monitoring and citizen science. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 115, 779–784.

It was one of the papers dished out free on the occasion of BRC's 50th anniversary
No mention of NBN at all in that
Like two supermarkets competing for business then
Does NBN have any similar contemporary publication or documentation

3

Re: iRecord vs NBN Atlas

I, personally, have always though that iRecord should be the data entry system, and the NBN Atlas should just publish verified data ie be an electronic version of published atlases.

Charlie Barnes
Information Officer
Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership

4

Re: iRecord vs NBN Atlas

Agreed Darwyn, I also would think that iRecord should be the data collection aspect for the UK system and the Atlas teh publication face of the operation.

iRecord needs more cash and people (developers) too in order to bring it up to the interface standards  and ease of data entry shown by sites such as iNaturalist.

Steve J. McWilliam
www.rECOrd-LRC.co.uk
www.stevemcwilliam.co.uk/guitar/

5

Re: iRecord vs NBN Atlas

Not only iRecord but NBN Atlas too. They've ideas for improving the interrogation facilities of the Atlas but that's going to require more cash and people as well.
I think the Atlas tools are pretty good, especially if you compare them with GBIF but if NBN have plans to improve them then that has my support.
The UK disastrously missed their 2020 Aichi targets, failing on 14/19 targets in the area of Biodiversity loss and one of the missed ones was "funding on biodiversity"