1 (edited by Lindsay_FifeNature 10-08-2016 12:04:21)

Topic: Use of / reliance on Taxon Designations in Recorder 6

Hi all,

I was just wondering to what extent other records centres relied on the taxon designations within Recorder 6: do you use them to search on / indicate the legislation that applies to a taxon / its conservation status, or do you use a user-defined approach?  Probably some of the below would be better directed to the Recorder 6 forum, but I'm grouping everything here first!

I've probably just missed the place it documents this, but where does the responsibility lie for keeping lists up-to-date?  NHM, JNCC, Recorder Steering / User Group, individuals?  And is maintenance of the lists through proactive checking or just based on whenever required changes are spotted and highlighted by any of the above? 

I'm feeling a bit wary of the lists as I'm never entirely sure which are completely up-to-date - the Scottish Biodiversity List for example doesn't include the 'changes since previous version' (in version linked to in http://www.biodiversityscotland.gov.uk/ … ity-list/).  Was the intention that those returned by the report Des4_Types_Available would be ok to use (Reports > Run > System Supplied > Information), or does this subset itself include other lists that are out-of-date or redundant? 

The Des1_Taxa in Designation Type report isn't working for me at the moment (with some exceptions - possibly International ones).  Do others regularly check the content of lists using this report or the NHM site and the date updated to work out which should be up-to-date, or do you include a specific disclaimer on your reports?

Be great to know if my feelings are largely unwarranted, or if not, how others approach this!


Lindsay Bamforth
Fife Nature Records Centre,
Information Officer

2 (edited by charlieb 10-08-2016 12:15:06)

Re: Use of / reliance on Taxon Designations in Recorder 6

We rely heavily on it (for all of the above), plus additional custom designations.

See http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-3408 and http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/page-5546

Basically it goes JNCC -> NHM -> Recorder 6. JNCC only put what they want on the list though and I don't believe they proactively check it, but will correct things if they're pointed out. There is a long thread at http://forums.nbn.org.uk/viewtopic.php?id=1736

Updating Recorder 6 via the NHM dictionary is part of the Recorder 6 support contract paid for by JNCC I believe.

Charlie Barnes
Information Officer
Greater Lincolnshire Nature Partnership

Re: Use of / reliance on Taxon Designations in Recorder 6

As with Charlie we rely heavily on the R6 designation library, using it to split and summaries records within semi-automated reporting process. (Records being extracted by designation using a custom designation set in the wizard). We also use custom taxon designations to define local priorities.

We don't have a disclaimer in place but i think that is a reasonable suggestion and i may now include one!

Ben Deed - LERC Officer
Merseyside BioBank

Re: Use of / reliance on Taxon Designations in Recorder 6

We too rely heavily on the designation library. We add our local designations and use them in combination with other designations, when extracting data for our partners and customers.
It seems, that recently not all new designations are added in R6 by JNCC or NHM, so I had to add them myself. Does anybody know, if that will happen at some point? Would it make sense, if LERCs would organise that centrally?

Hampshire Biodiversity Information Centre

Re: Use of / reliance on Taxon Designations in Recorder 6

It was one of my primary reasons for installing R6. Imagine how bad I thought things were when I found the S41 list was so incomplete as to be useless. It used to take so much of my time to get everything correct manually that R6 was the only way forward. Finding that the contributors were not that good at maintenance/instigation was very disappointing.

Tony Price
Data Manager, Somerset Environmental Records Centre (SERC)

Re: Use of / reliance on Taxon Designations in Recorder 6

We have also relied on the built-in lists, but have ended up having to re-check work on so many occasions (and explain missing entries to disgruntled recorders, looking for their Nb or RDB records) that we double-check everything now rather than trust the R6 lists.

Linda Moore
Gloucestershire Centre for Environmental Records

Re: Use of / reliance on Taxon Designations in Recorder 6

In relation to this (and what with EA reporting looming on the near horizon), I'd like to echo Wolfgang's query.

Would the simplest way for us all to address this be to get whichever LERC (Any volunteers?) wants to take on the job of producing/updating custom lists that we can then use for our purposes within our own Recorder databases or of producing the updates on behalf of JNCC (collectively funding the work involved in either case via ALERC).

What would be the best approach - practically, collectively and in terms of our joint reputation?