Not very accurate and there is limited ability to add a precision range on NatureMapr. There are several reasons why I have intentionally left it vague, even to moderators. 1. the dingoes are still a bit of a novelty and as word gets out, they may then be harassed to an unreasonable extend. I can give you several examples where NatureMap has been used to find unusual animals by photographers whose main aim is to get the ultimate image (which of course never exists), rather than record the animals existence on a particular date and place. These animals were then driven away from their home. 2. I was told about the approximate locale by someone who wished the place to remain suppressed and so I intend to respect that request. 3. I have no problems with providing a more accurate and precise location to researchers or moderators like yourself on request but at this stage I don't intend to upload these to NatureMapr or INaturalist. Kindest regards, John
@jb2602 (This refers to both of your records). The proper way to deal with location when the information is sensitive is to give the correct location then suppress it. That means only authorised people can access it. Giving a false location is not helpful to anyone, for example people looking at pack structure and extent of area occupied by each of the packs at Gudgenby. If you are unwilling to go along with Nature Mappr rules, it is better to remove this record, but i hope you respect what we do better than that. In my experience the reluctance to reveal dingo locations is from people who think that it means rangers will find out and go kill the dingo. I doubt that is the case in any national park (rangers usually know) but it is certainly not the case in Namadgi, where the rangers are keeping a close eye on which dingoes are where and how they are interacting with people. They are concerned to protect the dingoes from any reaction to a person being injured, so they want to encourage people to behave well.
John has already suppressed the location from public view which means only john, the moderators, the rangers and any approved researcher can see the location. The record is not sent to the ALA - Johns concerns are well founded but as you say clicking the suppress the location option should address them. The moderators could also mark the species as sensitive but this would not add any further protection to those where the protection has bene suppressed.
@michaelmulvaney please clarify that you are willing to accept false locations in the carpark, as well as supressing the location. If we are going to falsify locations as well as supressing them, i suggest they should be located to a place that will clearly be evident as false. The carpark location is a particularly poor choice as it could play into the debate whether there is a safety issue and maybe could affect decisions to cull certain individual dingoes.
No I meant that the exact location should be provided as this location is suppressed from the public and not provided to the ALA if that option is ticked