Issue on page /consider_distance_to_river.html

[louiseschreyers]

I have one question on this. For the distance to river intersection, in the cases where you have more than one intersection point per area considered (such as the one on the figure): do you sum up all values or do you take the mean? Just to know, I did not see the mention of river discharge data except in the title, so maybe remove it? I see this analysis as an exploration of different variables in relation to rivers. It might be good in the correlation table to indicate the categories labels instead of the categories code, for easier readability :)

[hammerdirt-analyst]

The chapter on river intersections was updated:

For the distance to river intersection, in the cases where you have more than one intersection point per area considered (such as the one on the figure): do you sum up all values or do you take the mean?

1. Yes
2. The analysis was run using aggregated and non aggregated. Also using river and lake survey locations and just lake survey locations. There is example dataframe output for all conditions.

sample output aggregated

Other notes: The definition of the code labels has been added. The distance and length calculations were reviewed and revised. Adding the the length of the river survey locations required this. However, the these calculations are now much more accesible and can be added to the survey data by using an outer merge on the location column of both sets of data (survey data and river length and distance data)

Update The chapter title was changed and octopus pots ? were changed to other borken glass. There are no octopuss farms on lac léman

Thank you for your comments