Luangwa and sub-sites - GiraffeSpotter

Feature Requests
,
1

What Wildbook should this feature be in?
GiraffeSpotter

What would you like to see?

I am the admin of the whole Luangwa Valley and I work with different stakeholders in the Valley who also upload their giraffes in GS. It is extremely important that all those sub-sites are being matched against each other.

What we would like to have is multiple sub-sites in the Luangwa:

Luangwa
Luangwa North
Luambe
Luangwa South
Lower Luangwa

So, all the giraffes in the Luangwa need to be matched against each other at all times.

We want to use all data across the Luangwa landscape to help estimate numbers, distribution, etc. Therefore, this is critical to sort out.

Would this be possible for you to carry out please?
And can you make me an admin of the whole Luangwa including the sub-sites please?

2

Maybe the addition of Location ID should not have be a Feature Request?

It seems that all Admins should have this ability, is this hard coded into the system somewhere for each Wildbook?

Thanks

Paul

@ACWadmin1
@jason
@Anastasia

3

@PaulK This isn’t about adding new location IDs, it’s related to this support request where Frederike wants any encounters submitted in Luangwa and its sub-regions to automatically be compared with each other without having to manually select each region before matching.

Currently, adding new locations to Wildbooks is a process that happens outside of the platform and as a result, only staff can create them.

4

Hi @Anastasia,

I just want to follow up on @FrederikeOtten feature request for all Zambia giraffe be matched against all subsites (not only the submission site) as they are physically open/connected sites but we still need separate management sites for collaboration purposes.
There are a few associated threads (e.g., Giraffe Spotter - Luambe) and I wasn’t sure where it was left.

Thanks,
Courtney

5

In the Wildbook 10.1.0 release, we added the ability to manually select which location IDs to match against within a bulk import. This should give you more flexibility in selecting a group of sites to match against without having to resort to doing this on a per-encounter basis.

As of now, I don’t have any updates about the status of the original request.

6

Checking in to say that we could consider an option for users to create their own pre-set match locations.

We generally don’t want to change default behavior because the number of folks who ask for this are in the minority. However, if you had the option to create and save a specific set of location IDs you can select to run a match against we could consider that as a project for our open source community to work on.