File: _1README_start_of_DNR_deer_mgmtunits_layers_comments_n_metadata_etc_DRAFT_by_strongm_v20230408.txt (this is a "README" file for starting to pass notes/comments/metadata for DNR-WLD historical deer_mgmtunits_layers). Date: 2022 Aug 31 cob (current durable draft, subject to change with DNR GIS environment, etc.). By/author of this file: Marshall Strong (WLD; specifically, Marshall Strong at email strongm@michigan.gov ), Mapping and Geotechnology Program Specialist / subject-matter-expert (SME), State of Michigan, Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR, www.michigan.gov/dnr ), Wildlife Division . ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Directions to start (as there are other info in the attached and other provided files): When downloading data from the (temp) compiled folder online at " https://www2.dnr.state.mi.us/publications/pdfs/huntingwildlifehabitat/DNR-WLD_requested_geospatial_data/DNR-WLD_deer_mus_as_is_compilation_set " = download ALL the provided data. I cannot guarantee the long-term locaion of these files is unquestioned and will not be removed. Download the content as soon as possible please. without this file (as it's being changed as add these stats) the total set of files are 27 files, 0 folders, 118,000,077 bytes, or ~112 megabytes. Safety of data: Our data server self-scans content regularly and should be checking for malecious added content, viruses or malware, etc. be we recommend you should scan any downloaded data and make sure it's safe as it comes into your system Also recommended is to download as binary and not ascii text option, but most current tools that help you download data (even say Chrome browser or other browsers) automatically scan and adjust to the type of file. Understand: Your download and use of our data means you agree to these data being as-is, and other caveates and disclaimers in the included files, so please read all provided files (except those you cannot be read, like special format data files or GIS files, etc.). I’d also recommend doing duplicated downloads and using more than one compilation set to check you have downloaded all the content files (which total 28 files) – meaning that there could be low-download times, errors caused, etc. and your compare of duplicated download of the 28 files can help confirm to you, when the contents directly match or are identical, versus if there are differences (then means something went wrong with one or more downloaded files). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello Reader- Consider this file and it's contents as an intro step into provided additional metadata (which may be very technical with specific standards or defined terms, and ultimately will be the Federal FGDC content standard for spatial metadata), or a phased step to gather information which maybe later will be in metadata but for now are here -and- that this may be imperfect apporach but it's the best we can do as improving things. There may be repeated blocks, particularly for very important points too. Note: overall this is an in-progress, as-is, compilation but not yet perfected where we (I) would like these data to be, but work is going on very hard to resolve. The Dept is also undergoing and has been for a couple years, massive changes in our GIS architecture, in possible and approved methods, standards-and-practices, options or settings, hardware (servers) plus software plus data mgmt plus methodology changes and staff changes happening too. Essentially data prep has been trying to group data into working approach allowing the easiest and funtional storage and serving of both current and historical layers. DNR Wildlife Division (WLD) has a large number of possible digital GIS layers, but (a major and repeated point) that the official and legal version of any defined unit is the authorized official and legal text definition where that unit was created; for most wildlife species, particularly huntable or trappable species, the source is the Michigan Wildlife Conservation Order (WCO) a "live" rolling-edit/updated" rule/regulations information source. Any spatial representation or map, or digitaql tool like a geographic information system (GIS) layer of polygons (such as an outlined area), sometimes lines (such as outlines), or rarely points data type. These maps and data layers (GIS data) are merely a tool of convience and are provided as-is, not warrantee, etc. = see the caveats and disclaimers at the bottom of this document and in other files provided. Ensure you read any and all provided documents as they are intended to help. The current decided approach, with ESRI consul/etc., is that there will be the following (using deer units as example): * DNR-WLD_whitetailed_deer_management_units_current_polygons * DNR-WLD_whitetailed_deer_management_units_historical_polygons The "current" layer will only be the current valid layer, and it will "roll-over" into the historical layer. The "historical" layer approach means there will not be layers named with a year in the layer name, but a compiled layer where an attribute field (year) will allow someone interested to query and select a given DMU year set, and either use those data, export out of that GIS multi-layer format, etc. Consider a GIS data layer to be created for need - so if not needed for a map or for work even within DNR WLD, then there actually may not have ever been a data layer created ever, yet a defined unit in text may exist. Those wishing such a unit not created, would have to create it themselves for thier needs, in such a situation. We do not create digital data for external requests, student projects, etc. as per State policy (requestors have to go through FOIA request processes too (information is online, just search off https://www.michigan.gov/dnr and search for foia where should be directed to process to submit your FOIA request). Warning on relevancy, accuracy, errors, etc.: Also consider that majority of our spatial representations or digital spatial data, are done for specific needs and may be done for a coarse scale or using coarser base data source information to generate outlines, versus those data you may compare our data to in your investigation. This does not mean there is error - it means the generated data for our needs was sufficient, and if our data not work for your needs, we cannot predict nor will correct/updated data just for that. A direct example of this is we may create species management polygons (digital GIS data) for creating a map figure (using GIS, then maybe even GIS map taken over to Adobe Photoshop or other Adobe products) as part of prep of our map for our final planned uses, like a map figure in an annual digest publication; this same planned map figure is the entire State of Michigan on a 5.5 inch x 8.5 inch page, and the polygon boundary may be 4 point width; therefore this coarser representation may work perfectly fine with our needs, but if someone wants to compare those polygons to fine-scale aerial imagery, then that person may find out data does not line up along the feature intended (e.g. county roads outlining many counties in the southern lower peninsula, is common). This does not mean our data is in error; it means our data created internally as a tool and which we happen to share, was not created for such fine-scale data work. ... and again, it comes back to the fact that the official, legal and authoritative version of any units, etc. are the source definition text like from the WCO or Land Use Orders of the Direction (LUOotD), etc. and that definition over-rules any differences seen in our spatial data representation (maps or figures) or digital data (which are mearly a convience or tool to help understanding the official, legal and authoritative version of any units, etc. are the source definition text like from the WCO or Land Use Orders of the Direction (LUOotD), etc. and that definition. Another common issue, where applicable, is that local on-the-ground signage or local township ordinances, etc. which may not be seen in our data, still are valid and over-ride or possibly or expected coarser map/figure or digital-data. Note that a unit can be created, exist as an official unit for a species, but (like for game species) may not have a quota or be open for hunting or trapping - yet still be found in the GIS layer for the subject species x year x situation. This current compilation version actually includes all deer unit polygons, lines (incl. extension lines into the Great Lakes), direct from my master but also recent improved data sets in zip versions of shapefiles exported from the system. This compilation is a little rougher than the ideal situation – meaning if do a union and compare then there will be heavy slivering between some units, on small scale (sometimes that just happens because of roundover of x/y locations when do a process, but other times it’s because of data conversion (think copy of a copy)). The folder where this file was found is a rough compilation and may not be ideal, but it's our (my) current best effort to get all the historical DMUs gathered together, and should have a number of important files reffered to below in the text, but also may have duplicated information, or metadata info in a couple of different formats (as approaches have changed over time, etc.) plus I attemped to export a master ESRI ( www.esri.com ) FileGeoDatabase of white-tailed_deer, and put that in the rough compilation folder. File name is= DNR-WLD_FGDB_draft_Deer_Mgmt_Units_ASIS_gdb_exportdata.zip ; size 31,598KB; date 2024apr09 . There will also (for now) be several zip files of exported ESRI-compatible shapefiles (which can be duplicated data of earlier content in the zipped ESRI FileGeoDataBase named above. With these files, and the other supporting files, this is the best-can-do compilation, at this moment in time. This has taken some time to pull together, from fall-winter 2023 to now 2024 spring. Attribute fields should be self-explanatory; however, beware if any have quotas, over-the-counter (OTC) numbers, etc. as I am not 100% sure those are correct. Focus on the DMU name which is a 3-digit number like DMU### (and described more in the whitepaper on how DMUs are named). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a few key reminders to start someone receiving the packaged DNR Wildlife Division's deer management unit data, seveal years, in a grouped data package as requested. ... 2015 to 2020/2022 DMUs, as notes, metadata, etc. as have now (as-is) and derived spatial data (GIS data in ESRI compatible shapefile format). Note even for contents of a single year, there may be or will be overlapping data, as per comments below. Michigan DMUs have been and are a mix of: - county-sized along county lines (particularly the Michigan lower peninsula); - county-sized approximately but inside a single county -or- crossing over county lines (multiple counties involved); - multi-county areas or units of more (area coverage) than approximately county-sized (for example there's several 3-county mutli-county units which go along county lines -or- in the Michigan upper peninsula there are multi-county units spanning multiple counties but not along county lines yet possibly using major roads or other features (because sometimes in the UP it s' hard to find county lines as compared to LP counties which often have roads along county line so well defined, legally and obviously at the smaller scale); - regional mult-county units or areas far larger than the 3-county unit size. Why are there different sized units? Different sized units are: tools to simplify regulations for the public/hunters (maybe date or license types differ); tools to sometimes provide more flexible hunting location options for public/hunters (meaning maybe a larger regional DMU is used for a license type allowing hunters to use that license over a much larger geographic area versus a single county sized area, etc.); tools used to manage the deer populations diffently matching the scale of data collection, deer observed populations by staff, or predictive population model on the landscape; and possibly a few other reasons which are usually explained in the annual DNR deer population / harvest report (served off the DNR website). Before finishing this data request I had to check the Michigan Wildlife Conservation order (WCO; see https:'//www.michigan/dnrlaws and the section and the bottom of the page) which the 1 true auythoritative official and legal defition of deer manangement units and other rules, regulatory or legal related boundary areas. No map, geospatial data representation, etc. takes prescidence over the appropriate WCO official legal definition block for any given (appropriate) unit; if there is any difference, then the WCO official legal defintion block is always the correct representation (for example if a digitizing error went down an incorrect road centerline, creating a difference in the polygo, then the appropriate DMU official legal definition is the correct line placement and not the digitized polygon or any maps made with the in-error spatial data. Doing the best to quickly package these data and this is also during massive State-of-Michigan, DTMB, and DNR Departmenta system, servers and software upgrades plus I am in transition from old off-warrantee computer to new one, along required deadline for turning in the old computer, etc. plus my busiest time of the year with both early+late and regular deer firearm seasons occuring. I've done my best. Before supplying data, I'm looking right now at the Wildlife Conservation order and DMU definitions in chapter 12, to make sure I am not missing any units during transition years.; when that's done then I will be passing a spreadsheet, notes/metadata, GIS shapefiles zipped etc. = the best info I have at the time/now. Overall comments = Very Important: * Read any and all text, doc/docx, pdf or image type files provided with those data that I pass. * If you don't review metadata (which you will see it change over time, hopefully improving, etc.) and note the as-is notice, warnings, caveats, disclaimers, etc. then we do not recommend anyone use those data UTIL they read the provided information. * We need to make sure your contact knows that for any given year, there may be overlapping DMUs that have or do not have a quota or are open to hunting, could be units differing for type of license or dates or both, etc. = it's not as straight and simple as many expect at first, and harvest results from Brian Frawley are presented usually by county and not DMU, in order to get a resampled reorganized results where those different complications and overlapping units are simplified down to counties if possible (most everyone understands counties, and counties do not normally overlap) ... I will try and put that in notes at root of the zip files and other notes (as doing in this text file which I will include with those zipped data). There is a document included with this rough compilation, and that helps explain the attempt at a systematic DMU naming convention created for the complete statewide DMU overhaul done in 2000, and that resulted in DMU changes all over state of almost every DMU from 1999 to 2000 version. There's a spreadsheet included with this rough compilation, and that helps show the DMUs over time from 2000 to current, and what Michigan Wildlife Conservation Order (WCO) section the DMU definition is from, etc. (as the WCO legal text definition is the actual official representation of the DMU). Also included is a zipped GIS layer of the counties to great-lakes shoreline, representing the source polygons for making the DMUs, and with this layer it should help if you find there's a missing DMU and you need to make it using the WCO definition. If you/your-contact has questions on data, they can contact me directly. -Marshall version 2023-dec (revised 2023 Dec 08 pm/cob) by Marshall Strong, MI DNR Wildlife Division, Lansing, MI ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Additional helpful information, improved 2022 (M.Strong, done for improving data/metadata documentation, etc.): "Mi Deer Management Units" (DMUs) are an information and legal/regulatory tool for public-facing way to see and understand the current DMUs boundaries across the state and help hunters reach additional information on DMUs (using a specific DMU 3-digit number and following up on that specific DMU information). Be aware DMUs in any representation, map or viewer do not and cannot show the various related complications and interrelated rules-and-regulations affecting activities within a given DMU, etc. Please see the DNR online deer information, rules and regulations, Wildlife Conservation Order, Land Use Rules of the Mi. DNR Director, etc. ( https://www.mi.gov/dnrlaws ) or DNR online deer page ( https://www.mi.gov/deer ) , for more information supplementing the DMU representations; It is the responsibility of every user of public lands, hunter, trapper, etc. to be aware of relevant rules and regulations relevant to their activities before engaging in those activities; if DMU or hunting questions contact the Michigan DNR ( https://www.mi.gov/dnrcontact ) -or- email DNR-Wildlife@michigan.gov or call 517-284-9453. DMUs are defined as specific geographical areas that split the entire State of Michigan into smaller pieces, and which allow the DNR to identify, manage, and communicate about various deer populations or deer management dynamics for a specific land-extent (polygon) area with all the other DMUs in Michigan. The official representation of any Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) game or nongame species management units such as deer (DMUs) are the official legal text/language definitions as stated in the Michigan Wildlife Conservation Order (chapter 12) &/or in the DNR Land-Use Orders of the Director (LUOoD), and are not any geospatial data or map product. GIS data, such as the DMU data layer(s) used in publications, DNR tool, etc., or maps produced with GIS data, are simply a tool of convenience and are not official or legal products or representations. Purpose: DMUs allow DNR staff, particularly those in the DNR Wildlife Division, to make strategic and operational management decisions concerning Michigan’s white-tailed deer populations. DMUs are created based on a variety of considerations like land ownership patterns, habitat, weather conditions, deer herd estimates, deer population management needs like harvest quotas, and other factors; DMUs are typically county-sized but some DMUs are actually aggregations of several DMUs in order to make a regional DMU which usually is used to represent management activities common across those individual DMUs and in order to more easily explain or present the larger area to cooperators, collaborators and public users like deer hunters. From a public perspective, for the majority, DMUs serve as the representational boundaries for hunters who take part in the various types of deer hunts throughout the fall deer hunting seasons, and are the extent representing the potential area where a hunter can use a purchased license (for an offered DMU in a specific hunt period in a specific hunt season or type). DMUs can have units where boundaries vary year to year, or have the same unit boundary but the dates, license types, quota, open/closed condition, specific rules and regulations, etc. vary for the exact same geographic extent and DMU-number, between two consecutive years. Externally: "Mi Deer Management Units" information is accessed off several location off the DNR website, such as https://www.mi.gov/deer , hardcopy digests or regulations summaries, etc. Internally: "Mi Deer Management Units" support various internal work re deer and presenting deer information in produced, public-facing, informational tools which utilizes a variety of inputs (see details; meaning DMU polygons, other reg/rule related data layers, etc.). The most important inputs should be or include that appropriate for a given year's "Mi Deer Management Units" information and the "Mi Deer Management Units" GIS data layer (polygons, and polylines for the current year's information), but some deer related rules/regulations do not use DMUs at all but may use other defining information or features (one example is deer hunting time zones uses specific in-Michigan vertical /north-to-south lines and a developed offical time-table by DNR Law Enforcement Division specialists using predicted sunrise and sunset times for coming hunting seasons for deer, and which provides one single legal/enforceable table of times Michigan deer hunters should then use to be compltely legal deer hunting; there are other examples like where hunters can use shotgun vs rifles, a firearm zone boundary curring across portions of the lower peninsula, ... and other deer rules and regulations aspects not set by DMUs but ultimately supporting DMUs and deer management in Michigan year to year). Citation for this digital data resource: Michigan DNR-WLD. 2023. (Cite the specific data set or app/tool by name and date, and if using the current folder found this file, then this is the rough compilation set of DMUs for (give the year range)), Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Division (WLD; specifically, the WLD Mapping and Geotechnology Program Specialist, currently M.Strong), P.O. Box 30444, Lansing, Michigan / MI 48909-7944, USA. Online: www.mi.gov/dnr; email: DNR-Wildlife@michigan.gov ; phone: 517-284-9453; cite the date these digital resources were accessed. Note that if citing a single DNR data layer, just use that information, but citing or crediting a viewer/tool/app then there may be additional supporting data layers to recognize/credit; see description and detailed metadata for more information. Additional supporting data set credits may include: This specifically prepared data and any derived tools are credited to State of Michigan (SoM), Department of Natural Resources (DNR), circa 2023, various staff, and may include a variety of possible data resources from a variety of sources like: SOM Department of Technology, Management and Budget, various staff; other SOM Agencies, various staff; or data providers like ESRI (ESRI.gov), USGS (usgs.gov), NOAA (NOAA.gov), various Federal agencies (USDA, USDoI, USFS, USNP, etc. sometimes through USGS.gov services and connections), or others (via Esri services and connections: HERE, Garmin, FAO, OpenStreetMap contributors, and others in the GIS User Community) which will be cited wherever possible. ... add the citation for DNR data, below. DNR Contact: On this specific data resource, the lead/primary contact is M. Strong, DNR Wildlife Division ( strongm@michigan.gov ; ph/c/t 517-256-5397), is the DNR Wildlife Division authoritative spatial data lead, and be aware it may be internal-use-only, draft, as-is, etc. so ask before using as authoritative data or check is marked as authoritative data as a category, tag, initial summary comment, or in the description, etc. (updated 2023 nov 14) Terms of Use No official restrictions are placed on these data, other than to recommend all users to read all provided metadata or notes for this digital data, to assist appropriate use of those data and prevent miss-use problems; additional requests are to appropriately cite the data source and direct any secondary requests to our site (where you received or accessed these data) for direct supply of those digital data used for other users. A standard data disclaimer applies: the information provided in this layer, internally, shared with others, or through the Michigan DNR Open Data Portal is accurate to the best of staff knowledge, is subject to change on a regular basis, without notice, is "as is" and an "as available" basis; this term "data" includes the digital spatial data but also all supporting information, metadata, notes, etc. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR) makes every effort to provide useful and accurate information but does not warrant this digital information to be authoritative, complete, factual, or timely either alone or with any added or associated DNR, State of Michigan, or other data. The State of Michigan (and the DNR) disclaims any misunderstanding, legality, liability, loss, injury, or damage incurred as a consequence, directly or indirectly, resulting from the use and/or application of any data contents from the DNR, this web site, or the State of Michigan. Some of the DNR's spatial data content is actually officially and legally defined not in any digital data layer, extent, polygon, line or point feature(s) but in official legal text in formal documentation, like the Michigan Compiled Laws, the Wildlife Conservation Order, the DNR Land Use Orders of the Director, etc. (see https://www.mi.gov/dnrlaws for more information). If the digital data content in this layer is indeed defined officially and legally in such documentation, then: (i.) the official legal text definition is always correct over any digital data representation; (ii.) any spatial data representation is simply a tool to assist understanding those defined features (points, lines, polygons, etc.); (iii.) the spatial data is not actually the official legal representation or any alternate official legal representation (as the text definition is official legal documentation always is the final official legal version), as (iv.) much of the spatial data content was developed for a specific end product (such as a map figure in a digest or regulations-summary publication, a figure attached to official memo or communication with the official legal text definition, etc.) and developed internally at a specific or approximated state-wide, regional or local scale which may not be the scale of your interests; and (v.) may not overlay with various possible base data resources at a sufficient scale or control-point matching level to assure it appears as accurate as those digital data features appear within our own computer systems. If these digital data are related to rules or regulations, then be aware that users may not have a clear understanding of those data without additional resources which may not be in the spatial data as feature(s), may not be other spatial data, may be on the DNR website or in rules-and-regulations, may change seasonally or annually in part or complete, and may require proactive investigation by you the user in order to develop the appropriate minimum understanding for the appropriate use of these data. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (end-of-file)