Greetings, I apologize for the delay in posting to the listserve. As I am sure it is true for you, it has been quite hectic for me.

My feeling is that we have a good definition for the integrative element of observational data. That is, the element in which observational data can be (and is) incorporated in existing Natural History collections data. To reiterate; An observation is a collection event that describes a phenomenon, and is bound to the spatiotemporal location where it was made. Furthermore, an observation describes an occurrence and can be linked to descriptions of other occurrences. Now we can begin to talk about the methods of aggregating observations. To do this means issues such as protocol (including precision, accuracy, and certainty in the methods), data quality, inferring negative data, and detectability must be addressed. It is at this point where observational data can begin to contribute and extend the value of the data held within biodiversity data networks.

What I would like to do is begin a discussion on survey/monitoring techniques and issues. Specifically I would like to develop the necessary requirements to define methodology metadata. For example, how does one distinguish between surveys and monitoring? For example, I consider monitoring as a protocol- driven collection of observational data gathered repeatedly over a time series at a specific location. Thus, I would distinguish monitoring from a survey in that a survey documents an occurrence of an organism(s) at a location at a particular time, and does not include repeated sampling.

Anyway, I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards,

Steve Kelling Cornell Lab of Ornithology 607-254-2478 (work) 607-342-1029 (cell)