add a "need mortality" census status?

[ValentineHerr]

It seems that giving an "in progress" status to stems that were censused but need to be mortality censused is not convenient for the crew.
Main issue (if I understood properly) is that it not easy to find the trees that they do need to revisit to complete the main census.

@jess-shue how hard would be to add a new census status like "need mortality", so it is easy to differentiate a stem that is done in the main census but will need to be revisited for mortality vs one that is "truly" in progress in the main census.

The crew also asked if it was possible to have a separate map with just the stems that need mortality.

[jess-shue]

@ValentineHerr
@teixeirak

This is understandable - and why combining these censuses in the first place was a worry. It would be possible to add the category - but it would not retroactively apply to already censused stems. I could potentially make a new map like I have for the tag replacements but that requires more time and then a third map...

I am finishing our extensive dendrometer band measurements (late) and then I fly to Wabikon to assist with the start of their census next week. The week of the 22nd I will be focusing on setting things up for Tyson's recensus. And then the week of the 29th I have Ryan Helcoski coming to core trees. It is unlikely I will have time to build a separate map until June.

[ValentineHerr]

Thanks for the context @jess-shue, you are a busy bee!

Adding the category only is fine. And it is fine if it is not retroactively applied. I expected that. It will be useful onward.
Thanks!

[jess-shue]

@ValentineHerr Sounds good, I will reach out to @mitreds for a good time to make edits.

I had a thought about adding some symbology to trees >= 100 mm DBH to designate them as needing mortality - I already have that field in the data. That would help them 'see' the trees they've already otherwise censused. Let me see what I can come up with.