Identification_Information:
Citation:
Habitat Interpretation
Citation_Information:
Originator: Center for Habitat Studies
Publication_Date: Unpublished Material
Publication_Time: Unknown
Title: SCB1_8_Habitat
Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: view
Description:
Abstract: Information produced from this project contributes new seafloor
images and maps that will be used to assess regional geology and characterize
habitats critical to fisheries management and planning of Marine Protected
Areas (MPAs), as required by Federal mandates stated in the Magnunson-Stevens
Fishery Conservation and Management Act and Sustainable Fisheries Act. Seafloor
mapping effort was focused on priority areas outlined by multi-agency participants
of the California Marine Habitat Task Force (CMHTF) Strategic Planning Meeting
(1/20-21/2000).
Purpose: These data are presented as part of a program objective to
identify, quantify and synthesize existing information critical to the
understanding of the linkage between fisheries and habitats. Before regional
exploration and site specific studies are undertake in regard to Essential Fish
Habitats (EFH), all possible data that can be used to characterize substrate of
EFH should be examined and, where possible, used to delineate habitat. To
complete this goal we identified, catalogued, digitized, re-interpreted, and
archived proprietary industry data including side scan sonar mosaics, subbottom
seismic profiles and bathymetry not previously available to the general
scientific community for the purpose of providing critical marine habitat maps
of the California margin. In areas where industry data did not overlap the
recommendations of the CMHFT, the CSUMB state-of-the-art seafloor mapping
facility acquired and processed new data.
Supplemental_Information: Comprehensive industry data sets consisted
of analog side scan mosaics, microfilm of high resolution seismic reflection
and single channel bathymetric profiles, rock samples and thin sections,core
logs, and written reports.
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: -122.52249
East_Bounding_Coordinate: -122.45442
North_Bounding_Coordinate: 37.16924
South_Bounding_Coordinate: 37.09712
Keywords:
Theme:
Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus: Geology Map Series Thesaurus
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
Theme_Keyword: industry
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.
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 industrial and new SFML
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: 235
Spatial_Reference_Information:
Horizontal_Coordinate_System_Definition:
Planar:
Grid_Coordinate_System:
Grid_Coordinate_System_Name: Universal Transverse Mercator 1983
Universal_Transverse_Mercator:
UTM_Zone_Number: 10
Transverse_Mercator:
Scale_Factor_at_Central_Meridian: 0.9996
Longitude_of_Central_Meridian: -123
Latitude_of_Projection_Origin: 0
False_Easting: 500000
False_Northing: 0
Planar_Coordinate_Information:
Planar_Coordinate_Encoding_Method: Coordinate Pair
Coordinate_Representation:
Abscissa_Resolution: 0
Ordinate_Resolution: 0
Planar_Distance_Units: m
Geodetic_Model:
Horizontal_Datum_Name: North American Datum of 1983
Ellipsoid_Name: Geodetic Reference System 80
Semi-major_Axis: 6378137
Denominator_of_Flattening_Ratio: 298.257
Entity_and_Attribute_Information:
Detailed_Description:
Entity_Type:
Entity_Type_Label: Captured
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Bottom
Attribute_Definition: Short description of the bottom induration
attributes
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Bottom_id
Attribute_Definition: Second letter of habitat characterization
code to designate the bottom induration. Attribute records for the field
consist of, s, h, and m.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Geo_confid
Attribute_Definition: The level of confidence of the geoglogic
unit. This will either be defined, questionabley defined, or unclassfied.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Geo_unit
Attribute_Definition: Geologic unit
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Hab_confid
Attribute_Definition: The level of confidence of the habitat type.
This will either be defined, questionabley define, or unclassfied.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Hab_type
Attribute_Definition: Habitat type. This consist of the sequence
of habitat (id)s.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Mdfr
Attribute_Definition: Short description of the modifiers.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Mdfr_id
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: Mega
Attribute_Definition: Short description of the megahabitat
attributes
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Mega_id
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: Mso_Mcr
Attribute_Definition: Short description of meso- or macrohabitat
types.
Attribute:
Attribute_Label: Mso_Mcr_id
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: Shape
Attribute_Definition: Polygon
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).
Metadata_Reference_Information:
Metadata_Date: 20020731
Metadata_Review_Date:
Metadata_Future_Review_Date:
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: 2.0
Metadata_Access_Constraints: None
Metadata_Use_Constraints: None
Metadata_Security_Information:
Metadata_Security_Classification: Unclassified