Pkg: Allow sightability observations?

[Huh]

@ericnewkirk should we allow sightability observations to be formatted? If so, what flags should be set and to what values?

I see ma_est_cnt_flag and similar in the data, which are set to false for composition data. Any help on how to format the sightability data would be appreciated.

[ericnewkirk]

Unfortunately WOS makes no concessions for probability of detection, sampling effort, or how many animals someone might have missed, it's essentially anecdotal. So no need to worry about the actual estimates from sightability surveys, just the groups observed. I think we just include the raw counts in the appropriate columns:

• females -> fe_adult_qty
• males -> ma_adult_qty
• young of year -> un_juv_qty
• unclassified -> un_unk_qty (these should be the vast majority, at least for deer)

For the other flags everything would be the same as comp, but we would probably use 9 for the observer activity code.

Valid Codes	Observer Activities
1	OA1 - Casual observation
2	OA2 - Classification counts
3	OA3 - Aerial Trend Counts
4	OA4 - Ground Trend Counts
5	OA5 - Live Trapping Operation - Animal
6	OA6 - Permanent Check Station
7	OA7 - Field Check Station
8	OA8 - Other Check Station
9	OA9 - Census/Survey
10	OA10 - Mortality Transects
11	OA11 - Nesting/Production Survey
12	OA12 - Marked Animal
13	OA13 - Damage Control
14	OA14 - Seasonal Range Survey

[Huh]

Sounds good and thanks for the discussion. For adult males the code you wrote many moons ago has us summing sub_males, adult_males and other_males to get ma_adult_qty, fyi.

[ericnewkirk]

Quick update: I'm testing the upload to WOS and it looks like the "est_cnt_flg" columns are either TRUE or blank, so no need to fill in FALSE (and it may cause problems).

I think considering subadult, adult, and other all adults has more to do with how Idaho classifies elk than anything happening in Wyoming. As long as what we type into "Yearling Males" in the UI goes into "juvenile_miles" in the background I think everything here makes sense. If I'm right on that the other two adult categories (subadult and other) should always be zero for our mule deer surveys.

[Huh]

It looks like all of the male columns were used in the Powder River 2025 composition survey. I will wait to update until I hear more.

[ericnewkirk]

You're totally right, I forgot we stuff Class I - III in those columns for comp. We should still be fine with the existing logic - I think Class I -> sub, Class II -> adult, and Class III -> other, but those are all adults by WOS standards. The comment above should still apply for sightability surveys.

[Huh]

Just so we are on the same page, sightability surveys only have a total count is what I think I am seeing. We can add classification for elk or whatever, but for mule deer I am only seeing a total.

[ericnewkirk]

Sorry, lost track of this for a bit. When all we have is a total they're all unclassified, so they end up in un_unk_qty