Lately I bundled four observation fields to "Built Environment" project. One of them is "Habitat Use". Field can be used to describe how animal is using the habitat in this particular observation.

Possible values and examples:

• food
• water (animal accessing water)
• grit (bird using sand for digestion, maybe chalc could be added here too?)
• cleaning (any resource used for cleaning)
• nest
• shelter (animal hiding to protective surroundings)
• platform (animal resting or moving at man made (or natural) structure)
• other

Some wordings are possibly not perfect, and more could be added.

You can add the field by typing "habitat use" (without quotes) at observation fields section of your observation page. Also when you add observations to "Built Environment", values for different observation fields are asked - if you decide to use these fields, be exact, otherwise it's ok to just leave them unfilled.

Further details of the "Habitat Use" field and observation examples: https://www.inaturalist.org/observation_fields/17919

I bundled bunch of observation fields to Built Environment project to make it possible to add more detailed information to observation. It's not mandatory to add them. You can still add observation to project without adding them, but even then additional dialog pops up. In the dialog, if you want to add just to the project without observation field, do so, don't click "add" to all observation fields, just for the project at bottom.

Do you think the addition is confusing as some arbitrary values are now added to these fields? Should I leave them out altogether and keep adding observations to project as simple as possible as it was before?

Or should the values be explained better? In that case it would still possible (and preferred) to just not add them unless it's clear how to use them.

I created new observation field to further describe the nature of organisms occurring at built environment in particular observation. It currently accepts following values:

• deterioration (when structure has broken to allow eg. animal in or plant growing)
• spontaneous (unintended feature of built structure, eg. cavity in the wall for animal to enter)
• planned (bird nest box, ground left undermanaged on purpose... )
• seminatural (near natural; typical maintained vegetation with some continuity which animal has habitated and is possibly expected and accepted to do so but it's possibly not directly planned so, maintained enough that it's not natural either, and likelihood rules out spontaneity)
• natural (as close as it gets: organisms at trees planted/grown long ago, organisms at near natural and undermanaged areas?? close to spontaneous or planned)
• failed (trapped or injured because of element of built environment)
• multiple (eg. planned element used by unintended organism, unintended elements left still for organisms to use after renovation...? )
• unknown (eg. intentions for features of old building are unknown vs. spontaneous/planned)

I may still change the classfication and words used - suggestions are welcome.

Important is what's happening in this particular situation of observation on organism's terms, not to long term retrospection if some species is eg. introduced.

You can add the field by typing "rewilding" (without quotes) at observation fields section of your observation page. Also when you add observations to "Built Environment", values for different observation fields are asked, but they are not mandatory. If you use these fields, be exact, otherwise it's ok to leave them unfilled.

Further details of the "Rewilding" field and observation examples: https://www.inaturalist.org/observation_fields/17884

Project has recently gathered many new members, adding plenty of observations well representing varied nature enhabiting and interacting human modified environment. Thanks all!