Identification_Information:
Citation:
Citation_Information:
Originator: Center for Habitat Studies
Publication_Date: Unpublished Material
Publication_Time: Unknown
Title: SM_USGS_hab
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form:
vector digital data
Online_Linkage:
\\SIDESCAN\G\SMBNMHS_GIS_Project\Habitat\SM_1_hab.shp
Description:
Abstract: Information produced from this
project contributes new seafloor images and habitat maps that will provide the
foundation needed by resource agencies to assess the impacts of both natural
processes and human activities on the marine environment, enabling them to
design comprehensive watershed management and restoration plans and monitoring
programs to protect the beneficial uses of the nearshore waters of Santa Monica
Bay.
Purpose: Extensive development and erosion
of coastal watersheds have long been suspected of negatively impacting coastal
marine habitats. The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that the
dramatic declines in the kelp forests of Santa Monica Bay (SMB), California,
can be attributed, in part, to sediment deposition and the resultant loss of
near shore rocky habitat. Geographic
Information System (GIS) tools were used to compare kelp coverage from 1893,
1912, 1989 and 1999 SMB surveys to identify areas of significant kelp loss over
time. The current distribution of rocky habitat was determined using acoustic
remote sensing (multibeam bathymetry, sidescan sonar. and sub-bottom profiling)
and video substrate verification. These data were used to determine if rocky
habitat capable of supporting kelp had been lost due to sedimentation.
Supplemental_Information: Data
Acquisition: Bathymetric and backscatter (sidescan) data were collected aboard
the R/V MacGinnite using a Reson 8101 multibeam echosounder. Differential GPS
(DGPS) position data were generated by a Trimble 4700 GPS with differential
corrections provided by a Trimble ProBeacon receiver. A TSS HDMS heading and
motion sensor provided heave, pitch, heading, and roll data. Coastal
Oceanographics Hypack software was used for survey design and execution. All
raw data were logged using a Triton-Elics International (TEI) Isis data
acquisition system. Water column sound velocity profiles collected using an AML SV+ sound velocity profiler.
Time_Period_of_Content:
Time_Period_Information:
Single_Date/Time:
Calendar_Date: 20020731
Time_of_Day: Unknown
Currentness_Reference: publication date
Status:
Progress: Complete
Maintenance_and_Update_Frequency: None
planned
Spatial_Domain:
Bounding_Coordinates:
West_Bounding_Coordinate: -118.851684
East_Bounding_Coordinate: -117.726607
North_Bounding_Coordinate: 34.047360
South_Bounding_Coordinate: 33.389199
Keywords:
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: REQUIRED:
Reference to a formally registered thesaurus or a similar authoritative source
of theme keywords.
Theme_Keyword: geologic features
Theme_Keyword: marine
Theme_Keyword: GIS
Theme_Keyword: multibeam
Theme_Keyword: habitat
Theme_Keyword: side scan
Theme_Keyword: digitize
Theme_Keyword: mapping
Theme_Keyword: seafloor
Access_Constraints: To be determined by
Center for Habitat Studies and contractor.
Use_Constraints: To be determined by Center
for Habitat Studies and contractor.
Point_of_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Organization_Primary:
Contact_Organization: Center for
Habitat Studies
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing address
Address:
Moss Landing Marine Laboratories
8272 Moss Landing Rd.
City: Moss Landing
State_or_Province: California
Postal_Code: 95039
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: (831) 771-4140
(Habitat Studies)
Contact_Facsimile_Telephone: (831)
633-7264 (Habitat Studies)
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address:
greene@mlml.calstate.edu
Browse_Graphic:
Data_Set_Credit: Habitat data processed by
the Center for Habitat Studies at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories.
Native_Data_Set_Environment: Microsoft
Windows NT Version 4.0 (Build 1381) Service Pack 6; ESRI ArcCatalog 8.1.1.649
Data_Quality_Information:
Positional_Accuracy:
Horizontal_Positional_Accuracy:
Horizontal_Positional_Accuracy_Report:
Problems and Solutions Summary
In this summary the term
""geotiff"" is used to describe both .tif images with
corresponding georeference information embedded in the header of the file, and
images with their corresponding georeference information in a separate .tfw
file. Also, the term ""source geotiff"" refers to the
scanned industrial data that was processed as geotiffs and written to CDs
during the first year of the project.
Not only does a Habitat map reflect
the features and the footprint of its source geotiff, the map also reflects the
accuracy of the georeferencing and rectification of the source geotiff. We tested
for geo-locational accuracy of the source geotiff and the Habitat map at 4
points during the map creation and processing. If discrepancies were found
during these checks, they were resolved before the processing was continued.
The first check for geo-locational
accuracy was during the Layout and Interpretation process. Any obvious
inconsistencies within the source geotiffs that would affect the accuracy of
the Habitat map were noted and resolved.
Two types of problems were fixed at this
checkpoint:
Pieces of the geotiff mosaic that were
out of position.
Geotiffs with stretched or warped
features.
To fix the geotiffs that had pieces of
the mosaic that were obviously out of position, we examined the original hard
copy ""paste-up"" mosaic and the industry hard copy. The
out-of-position area was identified both on the hard copies and in the geotiff.
The geotiff was imported into TNTMips and the out-of-position area was
digitally extracted, georeferenced, and re-mosaicked. Next, this repaired
raster mosaic was resampled. At this point, the raster was overlaid with a
TNTMips generated map grid, using the same projection as the original source
data. The overlaid grid was checked to see that the lines of the map grid
aligned with grid lines that are embedded in the original source images. The
TNTMIPS map calculator was also used to convert the original coordinate values
of the grid intersections in the geotiff to the appropriate coordinate values
of those same grid intersections, using the project's projection standard (UTM,
Zones 10 or 11, WGS 1984). These calculated values were used to further verify
the accuracy of the geotiff repair. After the geotiff raster was repaired and
tested, it was exported as a .tif file along with it's corresponding .tfw world
file.
Those geotiffs that appeared to have
stretched or warped features were also compared with the hard copy
""paste-up"" mosaics and the industry hard copy. If there
was an obvious difference between the digital geotiff and the hard copies, then
the geotiff was imported into TNTMips for repair. These rasters were resampled
and then tested against a map grid overlay. If georeferencing adjustments were
required, they were done at this point. Once the raster was repaired in
TNTMips, it was exported as a .tif along with the corresponding .tfw world
file. Geotiffs repaired at this point in the processing were used to create new
layouts and the Habitat interpretation process was continued.
The second check for geo-locational
accuracy was during the Habitat map vectorization process. This check took
place after the scanned Habitat map had been vectorized and georeferenced, but
before it was smoothed or merged. This is a particularly critical processing checkpoint
because errors in georeferencing found at this point in the Habitat map
processing can be corrected more readily than if those errors are not
discovered until after the merging and smoothing processes. First the Habitat
map's corresponding source geotiff was imported into TNTMips. The imported
geotiff raster was displayed with the vectorized Habitat map and a TNTMips
generated map grid as overlays. The map grid was in the same projection as the
original source data. An accuracy check was performed. The footprint of the
Habitat map and the map feature polygons were checked to see that they matched
the footprint edges and corresponding features in the geotiff.
Discrepancies in footprint and feature
alignment between the Habitat map and its corresponding geotiff were
indications of errors caused by:
Inaccurate georeferencing.
Use of the wrong projection.
If alignment errors were discovered at
this point, the repair and testing was done in 2 parts. First the geotiff georeferencing
was checked using a TNTMips map grid overlay, as we detailed earlier. If the
geotiff needed to be re-georeferenced then that was accomplished before any
additional testing or repair was done to the Habitat map. Once any repair
required for the geotiff was finished, we began the second part of the testing
and repair. The geotiff raster and the Habitat map were overlaid again to check
that the footprint and feature edges aligned. If they still did not align, then
the Habitat map was re-georeferenced using the geotiff raster as a reference
raster. When the repairs were completed and the geo-locational accuracy of the
geotiff raster and the Habitat map were verified, the repaired rasters were
exported as .tif files along with a .tfw world file and the Habitat map
processing was continued.
After the Map smoothing and merging
processes were completed, the geotiff and Habitat map were again overlaid and
the alignment of the footprint edges and the features were visually inspected.
If discrepancies were noted at this point, they were corrected before the
Habitat map was exported from TNTMips as an ArcView shapefile.
The final test of geo-locational
accuracy was done in ArcView.
A view was created using:
The composite shapefile of all the
geotiff footprints - from the first year of the project.
The California coastline shapefile.
The source geotiffs and any corrected
geotiffs.
The Habitat map shapefiles.
This view was then inspected for
positional discrepancies between the various layers. Any geo-locational errors
in the Habitat maps that were discovered at this point usually required
returning to the intermediate vector map products saved prior merging and
smoothing. The errors were then corrected and the Habitat map was reprocessed
from that point.
Lineage:
Process_Step:
Process_Description:
From scanned USGS multibeam data
files, we created layouts in ArcView and exported them as *.tif files using the
extension ArcPress. This process was
repeated at different scales until a final scale, most appropriate to the data
quality, was chosen. The layouts were then printed out in PosterShop. Mylar sheets were placed over the printed
layouts. Expert marine geologists
interpreted the areas using pencil to draw polygons characterizing features
based on their knowledge of the geology of the areas. In addition, they noted tick marks and northing/easting
coordinates obtained from the printed layouts.
The Mylar interpretations were then
scanned (WideImage program, scan preset is set to mylar) and processed in GIS
programs (TNT Mips and ArcView).
Scanned mylars were then printed and used to attribute habitats. This
also served as a double-check to edit the habitat interpretation as needed.
When processing the scanned image
within TNT Mips, the file was imported from a raster *.tif file as
*_rasimp.rvc. At this step, settings
for the Georeferencing are none and the Projection is undefined. The raster was georeferenced using the
appropriate projections UTM, Zone 10N or 11N, WGS 1984. 5 tick marks and associated northing/easting
coordinates were used for georeferencing.
The georeferencing cross-hair in TNT Mips was used to match up with tick
marks on the image. Residuals for each
of the tick marks were no greater than 1 meter and in most cases under 0.5
m. The UTM coordinates were saved
(*_UTM) and the file was re-sampled using the projection UTM, Zone 10N or 11N,
WGS 1984 (*_georef).
Next, the resampled file was raster
edited in the Spatial Data Editor within TNT Mips. Unwanted features such as speckles, attribute numbers and text
from the polygons, and tick marks were erased using an erasing tool. Dashed lines were connected and lines were
re-drawn using a drawing tool. The
scanned, printed and colored mylars were used as reference for editing. During raster editing files were saved
frequently as *_ras1, *_ras2, final version was named *_finras.rvc.
The final raster was then converted to
a vector file (*_vect) using the Auto Trace method (Trace 0 value cells, Remove
Dangling Lines -6, Remove Bubble Polygons -6, Thinning factor -1.25/1.50).
Several tests were run before the final conversion to check the result of the
tracing. Conversion took several hours so this process was run overnight.
The vector file was then edited to
delete or add nodes and lines and to correct the shape of polygons (*_vec1,
*_vec2 etc.). During vector editing the
original sidescan and bathymetry geotiffs were used as reference. Original
geotiffs were imported into TNT Mips using the correct georeferencing and then
projected as layers underneath the vector file in the Spatial Data Editor. The
final vector file was named *_finvec.
The edited vector was then warped in
order to create an implied georeference (*_warp). Output projection was set to UTM, Zone 10N or 11N, WGS 1984.
Smoothing of the warped vector file
was performed with the Vector Filtering tool based on necessity. If the lines
were too angular smoothing could round the curves. Several tests were run
before the actual smoothing to make sure we did not loose any features.
Smoothed vector file was saved as *_filt.rvc.
If there was more than one sheet to an
area, the warped (and filtered) vector files were merged (*_merge). Final cleaning was done in the Spatial Data
Editor (*_merge1, *_merge2 etc.). Again
the original sidescan and bathymetry geotiffs projected as layers underneath
the vector file were used as reference. Special attention was paid to the
overlying areas to make sure all the lines meet and polygons are closed. Once
final cleaning changes were made, the file (*_finmerge) was exported as a shape
file (*.dbf, *.prj, *.shp and *.shx).
Attributes were assigned to the
polygons in ArcView based on the geologist's assigned habitat
characterizations. Attribute table was
filled out based on former SeaGrant files adding the same fields to the table.
First only the Hab_type field was filled out due to expected modifications of
the habitat classification scheme. Project was saved as *_hab.apr.
Process_Date: 7/31/02
Process_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Joe Bizzarro
Contact_Organization: Center for
Habitat Studies
Contact_Position: GIS Manager, Project Manager
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
address
Address:
Moss Landing Marine Laboratories
8272 Moss Landing Rd.
City: Moss Landing
State_or_Province: California
Postal_Code: 95039
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone:
(831) 632-4419 (Ichthyology)
(831) 771-4140 (Habitat Studies)
Contact_Facsimile_Telephone: (831)
633-7264 (Habitat Studies)
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address:
jbizzarro@mlml.calstate.edu
Cloud_Cover: 0
Spatial_Data_Organization_Information:
Indirect_Spatial_Reference: California
Continental Margin
Direct_Spatial_Reference_Method: Vector
Point_and_Vector_Object_Information:
SDTS_Terms_Description:
SDTS_Point_and_Vector_Object_Type:
G-polygon
Point_and_Vector_Object_Count: 1041
Spatial_Reference_Information:
Horizontal_Coordinate_System_Definition:
Planar:
Grid_Coordinate_System:
Grid_Coordinate_System_Name: Universal
Transverse Mercator
Universal_Transverse_Mercator:
UTM_Zone_Number: 11
Transverse_Mercator:
Scale_Factor_at_Central_Meridian:
0.999600
Longitude_of_Central_Meridian:
-117.000000
Latitude_of_Projection_Origin:
0.000000
False_Easting: 500000.000000
False_Northing: 0.000000
Planar_Coordinate_Information:
Planar_Coordinate_Encoding_Method:
coordinate pair
Coordinate_Representation:
Abscissa_Resolution: 0.000256
Ordinate_Resolution: 0.000256
Planar_Distance_Units: meters
Geodetic_Model:
Horizontal_Datum_Name: D_WGS_1984
Ellipsoid_Name: WGS_1984
Semi-major_Axis: 6378137.000000
Denominator_of_Flattening_Ratio:
298.257224
Entity_and_Attribute_Information:
Detailed_Description:
Entity_Type:
Entity_Type_Label: SM_USGS_hab
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: FID
Attribute_Definition: Internal feature
number.
Attribute_Definition_Source: ESRI
Attribute_Domain_Values:
Unrepresentable_Domain: Sequential
unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Shape
Attribute_Definition: Feature geometry.
Attribute_Definition_Source: ESRI
Attribute_Domain_Values:
Unrepresentable_Domain: Coordinates
defining the features.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: HAB_CODE
Attribute_Definition: The level of
confidence of the geoglogic unit. This will either be defined, questionabley
defined, or unclassfied.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: HAB_TYPE
Attribute_Definition: Geologic unit
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: MEGA_ID
Attribute_Definition: The level of
confidence of the habitat type. This will either be defined, questionabley
define, or unclassfied.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: MEGA
Attribute_Definition: Habitat type. This
consist of the sequence of habitat (id)s.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: IND_ID
Attribute_Definition: Short description
of the modifiers.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: IND
Attribute_Definition: Third or fourth
letter of the habitat characterization code to describe the texture bedform,
biology, or rocky type and consists of _u, _c, _f, _m, _d, _v/g, _b, _h, _r,
_s, and _a. Undersocore preceding the letter denotes subscript.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: MES_MAC_ID
Attribute_Definition: Short description
of the megahabitat attributes
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: MES_MAC
Attribute_Definition: First letter of
the habitat characterization code to designate the megahabitat type. Attibute
records for this field consist of S, F,
A, P, B, R. These will be in capital case letters.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: MOD_ID
Attribute_Definition: Short description
of meso- or macrohabitat types.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: MOD
Attribute_Definition: Third or absent
(unclassified) letter of the habitat characteriztion code to designate the meso-
or macrohabitat type. Attibute records for this field consist of c, m, b, g, l, f, p/b, r, o, w, i, t, s, and
e.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: SLOPE_ID
Attribute_Definition: Polygon
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: SLOPE
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: AREA
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: PERIMETER
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: ACRES
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: HECTARES
Overview_Description:
Entity_and_Attribute_Overview: Attributes
assigned to polygon features were based on geologic interpretations. [See
MarineGeol_StrataUnits.doc]
Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation:
Greene et al. (1999)- A Classification Scheme for Deep Seafloor Habitats,
OCEANOLOGICA ACTA, vol. 22(6).
Distribution_Information:
Standard_Order_Process:
Digital_Form:
Digital_Transfer_Information:
Transfer_Size: 9.978
Metadata_Reference_Information:
Metadata_Date: 20030124
Metadata_Contact:
Contact_Information:
Contact_Person_Primary:
Contact_Person: Carrie Bretz
Contact_Organization: Seafloor Mapping
Lab, California State University Monterey Bay
Contact_Position: Project Manager, GIS
Analyst and Metadata Manager
Contact_Address:
Address_Type: mailing and physical
address
Address: California State University
Monterey Bay, Institute for Earth Systems Science and Policy,100 Campus Center,
Bldg 46A
City: Seaside
State_or_Province: CA
Postal_Code: 93955
Country: USA
Contact_Voice_Telephone: 831-582-4197
Contact_Facsimile_Telephone:
831-582-3073
Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address:
carrie_bretz@monterey.edu
Metadata_Standard_Name: FGDC Content
Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata
Metadata_Standard_Version: FGDC-STD-001-1998
Metadata_Time_Convention: local time
Metadata_Access_Constraints: None
Metadata_Use_Constraints: None
Metadata_Security_Information:
Metadata_Security_Classification:
Unclassified
Metadata_Extensions:
Online_Linkage:
http://www.esri.com/metadata/esriprof80.html
Profile_Name: ESRI Metadata Profile
Metadata_Extensions:
Online_Linkage:
http://www.esri.com/metadata/esriprof80.html
Profile_Name: ESRI Metadata Profile