Google gives iNaturalist $1.5M for AI tools—but users threaten to quit over environmental impact

iNaturalist, a nonprofit platform used by 3.7 million nature observers worldwide, received a $1.5 million grant from Google‘s philanthropic arm to develop generative AI tools for species identification. The announcement sparked significant backlash from the platform’s community, who raised concerns about environmental impacts, data accuracy, and the potential devaluation of human expertise in taxonomy.

What you should know: iNaturalist operates as a collaborative platform where users submit observations of wild organisms and rely on community expertise for species identification.

• More than 3.7 million people use the platform to record observations, from weekend naturalists to professional taxonomists
• The community has logged over 250 million observations of more than half a million species
• Current AI features suggest possible species identifications, but human experts provide the final consensus for “research grade” observations

The big picture: Google’s grant aims to enhance iNaturalist’s identification capabilities by adding explanatory context to AI suggestions, moving beyond simple species recommendations.

• The new generative AI tool would synthesize community-provided identification information to explain why certain species are suggested and how to distinguish between similar-looking organisms
• iNaturalist plans to develop a working demonstration by the end of 2025

Why the community is upset: Users voiced strong objections across multiple platforms, citing environmental and accuracy concerns about generative AI integration.

• Critics highlighted generative AI’s massive energy and water consumption, e-waste production, and contribution to habitat degradation through rare-earth metal mining
• Many worried about AI “hallucination” — when AI systems generate false or misleading information — potentially producing misinformation about species identifications
• Some expressed concern that AI-generated identifications could devalue professional taxonomists’ expertise if presented as authoritative
• Several users threatened to delete their accounts in protest

What they’re saying: iNaturalist leadership attempted to address community concerns with clarifications and assurances about the project’s scope.

• “If the demo we create is not helpful, compromises data quality, has outsized environmental impacts, or is overall too flawed, we will not keep it,” the organization stated in a June 11 update
• Executive director Scott Loarie emphasized: “There’s no way we’re going to unleash AI generated slop onto the site. iNaturalist is about human connection and expertise and using technology to help elevate and support that”
• The organization apologized for poor communication and assured users it wouldn’t replace human-curated identifications or give Google special access to user data

The response gap: Despite iNaturalist’s clarifications, some community members remained unsatisfied with the organization’s messaging about its future use of generative AI and implementation approach.