I appreciate when the photographer is forthright with it being an edit if they remove a branch/leaf/blade of grass, especially if they still share the original.

Any post processing is altering the original, and anything AI can do to a photo was done by hand in the past, including adding or removing subjects. I agree with you it doesn’t so much matter the method of alternation, it’s still the person presenting the image that is responsible for its credibility.

I also agree with the article that people uploading data to a crowdsourcing platform that is used by people trying to legitimately track animals to protect them is poisoning the well for people that are trying to do important work. A ton of resource is poorly funded, and having reliable volunteers is priceless. If people start throwing in made up datapoints, that takes a toll on real organisms. But then do you limit who can contribute, potentially excluding crucial photos? It just makes things a mess for everyone if people start becoming dishonest.