Data Management Plan
DMP Template v2.0.1 (2015-01-01)Please provide the following information, and submit to the NOAA DM Plan Repository.
Reference to Master DM Plan (if applicable)
As stated in Section IV, Requirement 1.3, DM Plans may be hierarchical. If this DM Plan inherits provisions from a higher-level DM Plan already submitted to the Repository, then this more-specific Plan only needs to provide information that differs from what was provided in the Master DM Plan.
1. General Description of Data to be Managed
Critical habitat includes the stream channels within the designated stream reaches, and includes a lateral extent as defined by the ordinary high-water line (33 CFR 319.11). In areas where ordinary high-water line has not been defined, the lateral extent is defined by the bankfull elevation. Bankfull elevation is the level at which water begins to leave the channel and move into the floodplain and is reached at a discharge which generally has a recurrence interval of 1 to 2 years on the annual flood series. Critical habitat in lake areas is defined by the perimeter of the water body as displayed on standard 1:24,000 scale topographic maps or the elevation of ordinary high water, whichever is greater.See the final rule (70 FR 52630) for descriptions of areas excluded from this critical habitat designation. Economic exclusions were clipped out of the data.
Notes: Only a maximum of 4000 characters will be included.
Notes: Data collection is considered ongoing if a time frame of type "Continuous" exists.
Notes: All time frames from all extent groups are included.
Notes: All geographic areas from all extent groups are included.
(e.g., digital numeric data, imagery, photographs, video, audio, database, tabular data, etc.)
(e.g., satellite, airplane, unmanned aerial system, radar, weather station, moored buoy, research vessel, autonomous underwater vehicle, animal tagging, manual surveys, enforcement activities, numerical model, etc.)
2. Point of Contact for this Data Management Plan (author or maintainer)
Notes: The name of the Person of the most recent Support Role of type "Metadata Contact" is used. The support role must be in effect.
Notes: The name of the Organization of the most recent Support Role of type "Metadata Contact" is used. This field is required if applicable.
3. Responsible Party for Data Management
Program Managers, or their designee, shall be responsible for assuring the proper management of the data produced by their Program. Please indicate the responsible party below.
Notes: The name of the Person of the most recent Support Role of type "Data Steward" is used. The support role must be in effect.
Programs must identify resources within their own budget for managing the data they produce.
5. Data Lineage and Quality
NOAA has issued Information Quality Guidelines for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information which it disseminates.
(describe or provide URL of description):
- Data creation process 2003 - 2004. ckuwr_chf1.shp 1) Fish distribution data were obtained from ODFW. ODFW 2003a; ODFW 2003b; ODFW 2003c 2) Initial preparation of the ODFW data involved digitizing the 24K fish distribution data and incorporation of the documented observation databases into the fish distribution databases. For more details on this process see the supporting documentation under the section on "Supplemental information". 3) The ESU data were intersected with the REO watersheds (HUC5s). The result was a network of fish distribution that could be grouped by HUC5s. REO 2002 4) The UWR Chinook salmon fish distribution was segmented based on LLID and Fifth Field Watershed (HUC5) boundaries. Unique codes (see HUC5_LLID under attribute definitions) were assigned to each segment allowing for analysis of the data at the watershed scale. This unique identifier can be used to link the Critical Habitat data set to the Habitat Areas data set. 5) The watershed data sets did not match up cleanly with the fish distribution data sets. There were numerous instances where the watershed did not cross the stream network at the correct location. These were often small segments that introduced unnecessary complexity to the data set. We searched for these segments and changed the corresponding HUC5 attribute to match the correct watershed. 6) Data were converted to arc coverage then projected, built and cleaned. 7) The attribute tables were built and attribute accuracy was verified. 2005 In the final stages of the rule making process for critical habitat, we received comments and new information about the distribution of the ESU. During the final review of public comments and new information we revised the distribution of the ESU and made changes to the areas that were excluded from critical habitat. For a more detailed review of the changes between the proposed and final rule please refer to the final determination for critical habitat, and supporting documents. *Note: FRN point lists were generated off the original coverages, not generated from the polylines in the shapefiles. Shapefiles were generated from coverages to post on website for sharing.
- The 2019 version CKUWR_ch.shp (GCS_North_American_1983 wkid 4269) was converted into the standardized feature class SalmonChinook_UpperWillametteRiverESU_20050902 (GCS_WGS_84 wkid 4326) using the National Critical Habitat Geodatabase processing protocol. During standardization, geometry was not edited. Attributes were edited. Metadata was edited and populated using the final rule and the 2005 html file "metadata_ckuwr_chf1" that was stored separately from the source data in ckuwr_chf1.shp (NAD_1927_Albers). Migrated field: "STRM_NAME" into "UNIT" Dropped fields: FID, FNODE_, TNODE_, LPOLY_, RPOLY_, LENGTH, CKUWR_CHF1, CKUWR_CH_1, HUC5_LLID, LLID, ESUCODE, REV_DATE, SUBBASIN, WATERSHED, HUC4, HUC5
- 2019-07-17 00:00:00 - ckuwr_chf1.shp (NAD_1927_Albers) geographic transformation, unprojected -> CKUWR_ch.shp (GCS_North_American_1983 wkid 4269). Geometry was not edited, attributes were not edited, metadata was edited because it was blank (stored separately as html file "metadata_ckuwr_chf1").
(describe or provide URL of description):
6. Data Documentation
The EDMC Data Documentation Procedural Directive requires that NOAA data be well documented, specifies the use of ISO 19115 and related standards for documentation of new data, and provides links to resources and tools for metadata creation and validation.
- 1.3. Is this a one-time data collection, or an ongoing series of measurements?
- 1.4. Actual or planned temporal coverage of the data
- 1.7. Data collection method(s)
- 3.1. Responsible Party for Data Management
- 4.1. Have resources for management of these data been identified?
- 4.2. Approximate percentage of the budget for these data devoted to data management
- 5.2. Quality control procedures employed
- 7.1. Do these data comply with the Data Access directive?
- 7.1.1. If data are not available or has limitations, has a Waiver been filed?
- 7.1.2. If there are limitations to data access, describe how data are protected
- 7.2. Name of organization of facility providing data access
- 7.2.1. If data hosting service is needed, please indicate
- 7.3. Data access methods or services offered
- 7.4. Approximate delay between data collection and dissemination
- 8.1. Actual or planned long-term data archive location
- 8.2. Data storage facility prior to being sent to an archive facility
- 8.3. Approximate delay between data collection and submission to an archive facility
- 8.4. How will the data be protected from accidental or malicious modification or deletion prior to receipt by the archive?
(describe or provide URL of description):
7. Data Access
NAO 212-15 states that access to environmental data may only be restricted when distribution is explicitly limited by law, regulation, policy (such as those applicable to personally identifiable information or protected critical infrastructure information or proprietary trade information) or by security requirements. The EDMC Data Access Procedural Directive contains specific guidance, recommends the use of open-standard, interoperable, non-proprietary web services, provides information about resources and tools to enable data access, and includes a Waiver to be submitted to justify any approach other than full, unrestricted public access.
Notes: The name of the Organization of the most recent Support Role of type "Distributor" is used. The support role must be in effect. This information is not required if an approved access waiver exists for this data.
Notes: This field is required if a Distributor has not been specified.
Notes: All URLs listed in the Distribution Info section will be included. This field is required if applicable.
Notes: This field is required if applicable.
8. Data Preservation and Protection
The NOAA Procedure for Scientific Records Appraisal and Archive Approval describes how to identify, appraise and decide what scientific records are to be preserved in a NOAA archive.
(Specify NCEI-MD, NCEI-CO, NCEI-NC, NCEI-MS, World Data Center (WDC) facility, Other, To Be Determined, Unable to Archive, or No Archiving Intended)
Notes: This field is required if archive location is World Data Center or Other.
Notes: This field is required if archive location is To Be Determined, Unable to Archive, or No Archiving Intended.
Notes: Physical Location Organization, City and State are required, or a Location Description is required.
Discuss data back-up, disaster recovery/contingency planning, and off-site data storage relevant to the data collection
9. Additional Line Office or Staff Office Questions
Line and Staff Offices may extend this template by inserting additional questions in this section.