Butterfly & Macro Moth recording

3 posts / 0 new
Last post
Butterfly & Macro Moth recording

I note we now have a dedicated sub menu for recorders wishing to record moths . I welcome the change as i should no longer have to reject records of plants nor non lep items .Its important to give a site name " Bridgnorth" not a ref like 183.22 which means absolutely nothing to the CMBR (aka Me) these may well be transect references , but dont help when cross referencing grids with locations to know they are in fact correct .

I do not use the irecord myself, as verification gives me enough to do as it is. however could there be a Sticky post (believe thats the term) added so people are aware of this before entering records? and would it not be usefull to add the same idea for butterfly recorders? so we no longer see pre-adult or other vague terms etc in the resulting records.





If it is stuff coming from transects as you suggest then it may be the spearate transect recording system rather than the moths form on here that is generating these names (I just found out recently that all the transect records I submit are getting copied across to iRecord).

This data comes from the

This data comes from the UKBMS.  We are currently migrating all the UKBMS data holdings into the online system.  Once the data is loaded we will update any remaining location names that are still transect codes rather than more meaningful site names.  Sorry for the inconvenience in the meantime.


Log in or register to post comments