How do you maintain quality control? How are data validated?
What volume of data are coming in and how are they being handled?
At what scale to you receive/provide information?
What kind of resources will be needed for data entry, verification, training?
What happens if people submit bad data on purpose? How can we be sure that people don’t abuse thisprogram?
What are the costs to school in Washington for training and implementation?
Q. How do you maintain quality control? How are data validated?
A. There is a 3 step process. (1) Data are edited for data entry and species codes errors. This is done by printing these data and comparing the codes to a masterfile. Incorrect codes are highlighted, as will county code errors, month and observer id’s. (2) These data are imported into GIS and displayed on a state map with the state’s Gap Analysis vertebrate distribution maps. Records falling outside of the maps are reviewed for errors. This is our coarse scale evaluation. Species of concern or of special interest to researchers are further reviewed whether or not the points fell outside the maps. This is our fine scale evaluation. Questionable records can be traced back to the provider and an assessment made about the observation and the level of experience of the provider. Questionable records are marked because one questionable report may be ignored, but 100 questionable reports for the same species is something to investigate. Therefore, questionable records are maintained in the database, although not used in the general analysis. (3) Depending on the state’s web site, individuals may see their own records to verify location accuracy, or locations on a state map. Reports via newsletters or customized reports from participants submitting large quantity of data are provided back to the users.
Q. What volume of data are coming in and how are they being handled?
A. Volume depends on the length the program has been running in a state. On average, 3,000 records are submitted the first year of the program and after 6 years, 31,000 records have been submitted. Between 400-1,200 species per state (some states allow invertebrates) have been reported by NatureMappers. Data are handled differently in each state. On-line data entry makes the entry easier. Some users have database software or spreadsheets so that they may maintain their own database besides submitting their data to NatureMapping. Data are submitted by participants that take a NatureMapping workshop, although in Washington , data submitted by experts, groups such as Audubon, or graduate students are collected.
Q. How will these data be used?
A. To assess Gap maps, provide up-to-date data for re-Gap models, develop winter bird distribution maps, and map the expansion of introduced species. Data may be used by natural resource agencies, NatureMappers for local projects, city and county land planners, and for the State Conservation Strategy monitoring element.
Q. At what scale to you receive/provide information?
A. We are collecting data for a coarse scale evaluation, primarily for state and national analysis. Washington displays townships (36 square mile grids) on the state maps and sections (1 square mile) at finer scales. Latitude and longitude or UTM coordinates are accepted. The coarseness at the township and section level has helped alleviate “the big brother is looking at you” and proprietary information worries. Lat/long or UTM points are displayed on the states’ websites about the size of a township for a national consistency.
Q. What kind of resources will be needed for data entry, verification, training?
A. Data entry depends on the state. In Washington , volunteers input wildlife observations if the provider can not. However, on-line data entry and submission of data via email are becoming mandatory because of the volume. State coordinators review data at the coarse scale. Our focus is to develop training centers with trained facilitators around the state to review local data before submission. All of our experts in the workshops provide in-kind support.
Q. What happens if people submit bad data on purpose? How can we be sure that people don’t abuse thisprogram?
A. People involved in this project want to make a difference and are excited to provide data that really will be used. We work with them to improve their skills. They also know that people will use their data in their community. If the same observer submits erroneous data, we can ignore these data or preferably, discuss the errors with the person. The maps and datasets on which public data is overlaid were created by experts. Errors or bad data stand out during the editing process.
This program deals with volumes of data. One false record will not affect a land management decision. We have too many other resources to use in concert with the public data. We are using expert, research, agency AND public data. No one dataset provides all of the answers, but together create a powerful picture. A crucial point here is, if the community is involved and know that they can use these data, they will not abuse the Program, and they will monitor their own discrepancies.
Another crucial point is when errors are identified, we get back to the people so they can learn and correct their errors (i.e., FEEDBACK LOOP). People get justifiably upset if they spend their time providing data and you throw it out. They want to conduct their field work in accordance to our rules and do it correctly. They should be made aware of their mistakes and how to improve their work.
Q. Will collection/salvage permits cause a problem or will everything fit under personal possession limits?
A. We have had very few people ask about trapping. Schools usually have a permit if they have specimens. When we do have a request, we explain the need for a collection/salvage permit and to contact their regional state fish and wildlife biologist. Salvage permits take a long time to process, but if a teacher is conducting work with a field biologist, the biologists makes the decision if one is needed. I have found professionals with salvage permits who are willing to assist their community and work with teachers until their permit is awarded.
Q. What are the costs to school in Washington for training and implementation?
A. It is hard to put a single cost to schools. Teachers use their own or school funds to attend our workshops. Many teachers take the workshops multiple times as they progress with designing a project that fits their abilities, finances, and their ability to integrate the program into their existing curriculum. If they want to use technology, they write grants themselves. Many workshops are funded by grants provided by local Audubon chapters, conservation districts, or by a city program. Teachers, for example, in one school district have been attending workshops over the past 4 years without any cost to the teachers.