Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This group of layers contains a collection of video and sediment sample annotation datasets from the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, the Nature Conservancy and the Environmental Protection Agency.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Underwater videos were acquired and annotated by mapping experts to identify and characterize geoforms, substrates and biological cover types offshore the Bayfield Peninsula, Wisconsin, Lake Superior. The annotations ground-truth remotely sensed lakebed imagery derived from previous surveys of the lakebed with a multibeam echosounder , and can be used to assess the accuracy of classified lakebed maps. Videos were acquired by an Outland 1000 ROV deployed by a team from the National Park Service and Northwestern Michigan College during Jun 15-17, 2021 and a Seaviewer underwater drop camera deployed by a team from NCCOS and GLERL during Aug 9-17, 2021. The platform of operation was the R2512, a 25</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>’</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN> SeaArk operated by GLERL. This dataset includes 378 videos each representing a unique location on the lakebed. The lakebed videos were acquired as part of a broader collaborative benthic mapping project to address emerging littoral issues in Wisconsin waters funded by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Project partners include the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Office of Coastal Management, the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, Office for National Marine Sanctuaries</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>,</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN> and the National Park Service. </SPAN></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Name: EPA National Coastal Condition Assessment Video Sites
Display Field: SiteID
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPoint
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P STYLE="margin:0 0 11 0;"><SPAN>Layer shows the locations of underwater videos taken for the lakebed for the study area (Bark Point to Sand Island) and around Sand Island. The videos are part of the EPA’s National Coastal Condition Assessment Program (NCCA) and the Dreissena mussel’s assessment in Lake Superior. The NCCA videos were collected in 2010 and 2015 using the Seaviewer camera. The shapefile contains links to the videos (2010 and 2015) on YouTube and can be found at the EPA NCCA underwater videos viewer here https://gispub.epa.gov/NCCA/. The shapefile also contains information on the interpretation of the videos using NCCOS classification form. All videos were obtained from the EPA and uploaded to NCCOS local network. Data was provided by Molly Wick (wick.molly@epa.gov) and Johnathon Launspach (launspach.jonathon@epa.gov), and shapefile and video interpretation by Ayman Mabrouk (</SPAN><A href="mailto:ayman.mabrouk@noaa.gov" STYLE="text-decoration:underline;"><SPAN><SPAN>ayman.mabrouk@noaa.gov</SPAN></SPAN></A><SPAN><SPAN>).</SPAN></SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Name: EPA National Coastal Condition Assessment Sediment Sample Sites
Display Field: SITE_ID
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPoint
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This shapefile contains information on the locations of the sediment samples in the study area (Bark Point to Sand Island) and around Sand Island. It also shows the grain size analysis results for these samples. This sediment sampling was part of the EPA’s National Coastal Condition Assessment (NCCA) program. The samples were taken in 2010 and 2015. The data source was Molly Wick (wick.molly@epa.gov ). Data summarized and shapefile created by Ayman Mabrouk (ayman.mabrouk@noaa.gov).</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Substrate soundings as digitized from a digital version of Lake Superior Chart No 3, 1873.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: Digitized by The Nature Conservancy
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This group of layers contains layers showing a selection of key attributes of the lakebed and benthic ecology derived from underwater video annotations.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Underwater videos were acquired and annotated by mapping experts to identify and characterize geoforms, substrates and biological cover types offshore the Bayfield Peninsula, Wisconsin, Lake Superior. The annotations ground-truth remotely sensed lakebed imagery derived from previous surveys of the lakebed with a multibeam echosounder , and can be used to assess the accuracy of classified lakebed maps. Videos were acquired by an Outland 1000 ROV deployed by a team from the National Park Service and Northwestern Michigan College during Jun 15-17, 2021 and a Seaviewer underwater drop camera deployed by a team from NCCOS and GLERL during Aug 9-17, 2021. The platform of operation was the R2512, a 25</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>’</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN> SeaArk operated by GLERL. This dataset includes 378 videos each representing a unique location on the lakebed. The lakebed videos were acquired as part of a broader collaborative benthic mapping project to address emerging littoral issues in Wisconsin waters funded by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Project partners include the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Office of Coastal Management, the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, Office for National Marine Sanctuaries</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>,</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN> and the National Park Service. </SPAN></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Underwater videos were acquired and annotated by mapping experts to identify and characterize geoforms, substrates and biological cover types offshore the Bayfield Peninsula, Wisconsin, Lake Superior. The annotations ground-truth remotely sensed lakebed imagery derived from previous surveys of the lakebed with a multibeam echosounder , and can be used to assess the accuracy of classified lakebed maps. Videos were acquired by an Outland 1000 ROV deployed by a team from the National Park Service and Northwestern Michigan College during Jun 15-17, 2021 and a Seaviewer underwater drop camera deployed by a team from NCCOS and GLERL during Aug 9-17, 2021. The platform of operation was the R2512, a 25</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>’</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN> SeaArk operated by GLERL. This dataset includes 378 videos each representing a unique location on the lakebed. The lakebed videos were acquired as part of a broader collaborative benthic mapping project to address emerging littoral issues in Wisconsin waters funded by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Project partners include the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Office of Coastal Management, the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, Office for National Marine Sanctuaries</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>,</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN> and the National Park Service. </SPAN></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Underwater videos were acquired and annotated by mapping experts to identify and characterize geoforms, substrates and biological cover types offshore the Bayfield Peninsula, Wisconsin, Lake Superior. The annotations ground-truth remotely sensed lakebed imagery derived from previous surveys of the lakebed with a multibeam echosounder , and can be used to assess the accuracy of classified lakebed maps. Videos were acquired by an Outland 1000 ROV deployed by a team from the National Park Service and Northwestern Michigan College during Jun 15-17, 2021 and a Seaviewer underwater drop camera deployed by a team from NCCOS and GLERL during Aug 9-17, 2021. The platform of operation was the R2512, a 25</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>’</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN> SeaArk operated by GLERL. This dataset includes 378 videos each representing a unique location on the lakebed. The lakebed videos were acquired as part of a broader collaborative benthic mapping project to address emerging littoral issues in Wisconsin waters funded by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Project partners include the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Office of Coastal Management, the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, Office for National Marine Sanctuaries</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>,</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN> and the National Park Service. </SPAN></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Underwater videos were acquired and annotated by mapping experts to identify and characterize geoforms, substrates and biological cover types offshore the Bayfield Peninsula, Wisconsin, Lake Superior. The annotations ground-truth remotely sensed lakebed imagery derived from previous surveys of the lakebed with a multibeam echosounder , and can be used to assess the accuracy of classified lakebed maps. Videos were acquired by an Outland 1000 ROV deployed by a team from the National Park Service and Northwestern Michigan College during Jun 15-17, 2021 and a Seaviewer underwater drop camera deployed by a team from NCCOS and GLERL during Aug 9-17, 2021. The platform of operation was the R2512, a 25</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>’</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN> SeaArk operated by GLERL. This dataset includes 378 videos each representing a unique location on the lakebed. The lakebed videos were acquired as part of a broader collaborative benthic mapping project to address emerging littoral issues in Wisconsin waters funded by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Project partners include the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Office of Coastal Management, the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, Office for National Marine Sanctuaries</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>,</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN> and the National Park Service. </SPAN></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Underwater videos were acquired and annotated by mapping experts to identify and characterize geoforms, substrates and biological cover types offshore the Bayfield Peninsula, Wisconsin, Lake Superior. The annotations ground-truth remotely sensed lakebed imagery derived from previous surveys of the lakebed with a multibeam echosounder , and can be used to assess the accuracy of classified lakebed maps. Videos were acquired by an Outland 1000 ROV deployed by a team from the National Park Service and Northwestern Michigan College during Jun 15-17, 2021 and a Seaviewer underwater drop camera deployed by a team from NCCOS and GLERL during Aug 9-17, 2021. The platform of operation was the R2512, a 25</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>’</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN> SeaArk operated by GLERL. This dataset includes 378 videos each representing a unique location on the lakebed. The lakebed videos were acquired as part of a broader collaborative benthic mapping project to address emerging littoral issues in Wisconsin waters funded by the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative. Project partners include the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, Office of Coastal Management, the Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, Office for National Marine Sanctuaries</SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>,</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN> and the National Park Service. </SPAN></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><P><SPAN>This group layer contains various bottom type and benthic habitat type layers from predictive habitat models.</SPAN></P></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Geomorphology, substrate and habitats were classified on the lake bottom using unique patterns observed in bathymetry and backscatter collected by a Teledyne-Reson 7125 multibeam echosounder mounted to the Research Vessel (R/V) Echo. The Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS; FGDC 2012) was used to organize and interpret lakebed bottom types. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Within the CMECS framework, the lakebed is classified into geoform levels 1 and 2, substrate units for origin, class and subclass and biological units for setting, class, subclass, group and community. Classification was performed on lakebed feature-based segments derived from automated partitioning of bathymetry, backscatter, and depth derivatives (e.g., slope, rugosity, and curvature) in the ENVI (v.4.7) image processing analysis software. The smallest segment area or minimum mapping unit was 100 square meters, defined by the scale of discernible surface patterns in remotely sensed data.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Substrate and biological units were classified according to predictions derived from random forest models trained on 127 annotated underwater lakebed videos distributed across the study area. A second independent set of annotated underwater videos were used to assess the accuracy of model predictions for substrate subclass and biotic community. Overall class accuracies for substrate subsclass and biotic community are 80% and 74%, respectively. When accuracy is calculated proportional to class area, the accuracies are 83% and 80%, respectively. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Geoforms were classified by interpretation of substrate prediction and remote sensing data by a mapping expert. No accuracy was quantified for geoforms since their scale is larger than the footprint of available in situ video annotations.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Geomorphology, substrate and habitats were classified on the lake bottom using unique patterns observed in bathymetry and backscatter collected by a Teledyne-Reson 7125 multibeam echosounder mounted to the Research Vessel (R/V) Echo. The Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS; FGDC 2012) was used to organize and interpret lakebed bottom types. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Within the CMECS framework, the lakebed is classified into geoform levels 1 and 2, substrate units for origin, class and subclass and biological units for setting, class, subclass, group and community. Classification was performed on lakebed feature-based segments derived from automated partitioning of bathymetry, backscatter, and depth derivatives (e.g., slope, rugosity, and curvature) in the ENVI (v.4.7) image processing analysis software. The smallest segment area or minimum mapping unit was 100 square meters, defined by the scale of discernible surface patterns in remotely sensed data.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Substrate and biological units were classified according to predictions derived from random forest models trained on 127 annotated underwater lakebed videos distributed across the study area. A second independent set of annotated underwater videos were used to assess the accuracy of model predictions for substrate subclass and biotic community. Overall class accuracies for substrate subsclass and biotic community are 80% and 74%, respectively. When accuracy is calculated proportional to class area, the accuracies are 83% and 80%, respectively. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Geoforms were classified by interpretation of substrate prediction and remote sensing data by a mapping expert. No accuracy was quantified for geoforms since their scale is larger than the footprint of available in situ video annotations.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Geomorphology, substrate and habitats were classified on the lake bottom using unique patterns observed in bathymetry and backscatter collected by a Teledyne-Reson 7125 multibeam echosounder mounted to the Research Vessel (R/V) Echo. The Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS; FGDC 2012) was used to organize and interpret lakebed bottom types. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Within the CMECS framework, the lakebed is classified into geoform levels 1 and 2, substrate units for origin, class and subclass and biological units for setting, class, subclass, group and community. Classification was performed on lakebed feature-based segments derived from automated partitioning of bathymetry, backscatter, and depth derivatives (e.g., slope, rugosity, and curvature) in the ENVI (v.4.7) image processing analysis software. The smallest segment area or minimum mapping unit was 100 square meters, defined by the scale of discernible surface patterns in remotely sensed data.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Substrate and biological units were classified according to predictions derived from random forest models trained on 127 annotated underwater lakebed videos distributed across the study area. A second independent set of annotated underwater videos were used to assess the accuracy of model predictions for substrate subclass and biotic community. Overall class accuracies for substrate subsclass and biotic community are 80% and 74%, respectively. When accuracy is calculated proportional to class area, the accuracies are 83% and 80%, respectively. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Geoforms were classified by interpretation of substrate prediction and remote sensing data by a mapping expert. No accuracy was quantified for geoforms since their scale is larger than the footprint of available in situ video annotations.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Geomorphology, substrate and habitats were classified on the lake bottom using unique patterns observed in bathymetry and backscatter collected by a Teledyne-Reson 7125 multibeam echosounder mounted to the Research Vessel (R/V) Echo. The Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS; FGDC 2012) was used to organize and interpret lakebed bottom types. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Within the CMECS framework, the lakebed is classified into geoform levels 1 and 2, substrate units for origin, class and subclass and biological units for setting, class, subclass, group and community. Classification was performed on lakebed feature-based segments derived from automated partitioning of bathymetry, backscatter, and depth derivatives (e.g., slope, rugosity, and curvature) in the ENVI (v.4.7) image processing analysis software. The smallest segment area or minimum mapping unit was 100 square meters, defined by the scale of discernible surface patterns in remotely sensed data.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Substrate and biological units were classified according to predictions derived from random forest models trained on 127 annotated underwater lakebed videos distributed across the study area. A second independent set of annotated underwater videos were used to assess the accuracy of model predictions for substrate subclass and biotic community. Overall class accuracies for substrate subsclass and biotic community are 80% and 74%, respectively. When accuracy is calculated proportional to class area, the accuracies are 83% and 80%, respectively. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Geoforms were classified by interpretation of substrate prediction and remote sensing data by a mapping expert. No accuracy was quantified for geoforms since their scale is larger than the footprint of available in situ video annotations.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Geomorphology, substrate and habitats were classified on the lake bottom using unique patterns observed in bathymetry and backscatter collected by a Teledyne-Reson 7125 multibeam echosounder mounted to the Research Vessel (R/V) Echo. The Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS; FGDC 2012) was used to organize and interpret lakebed bottom types. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Within the CMECS framework, the lakebed is classified into geoform levels 1 and 2, substrate units for origin, class and subclass and biological units for setting, class, subclass, group and community. Classification was performed on lakebed feature-based segments derived from automated partitioning of bathymetry, backscatter, and depth derivatives (e.g., slope, rugosity, and curvature) in the ENVI (v.4.7) image processing analysis software. The smallest segment area or minimum mapping unit was 100 square meters, defined by the scale of discernible surface patterns in remotely sensed data.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Substrate and biological units were classified according to predictions derived from random forest models trained on 127 annotated underwater lakebed videos distributed across the study area. A second independent set of annotated underwater videos were used to assess the accuracy of model predictions for substrate subclass and biotic community. Overall class accuracies for substrate subsclass and biotic community are 80% and 74%, respectively. When accuracy is calculated proportional to class area, the accuracies are 83% and 80%, respectively. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Geoforms were classified by interpretation of substrate prediction and remote sensing data by a mapping expert. No accuracy was quantified for geoforms since their scale is larger than the footprint of available in situ video annotations.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Geomorphology, substrate and habitats were classified on the lake bottom using unique patterns observed in bathymetry and backscatter collected by a Teledyne-Reson 7125 multibeam echosounder mounted to the Research Vessel (R/V) Echo. The Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS; FGDC 2012) was used to organize and interpret lakebed bottom types. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Within the CMECS framework, the lakebed is classified into geoform levels 1 and 2, substrate units for origin, class and subclass and biological units for setting, class, subclass, group and community. Classification was performed on lakebed feature-based segments derived from automated partitioning of bathymetry, backscatter, and depth derivatives (e.g., slope, rugosity, and curvature) in the ENVI (v.4.7) image processing analysis software. The smallest segment area or minimum mapping unit was 100 square meters, defined by the scale of discernible surface patterns in remotely sensed data.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Substrate and biological units were classified according to predictions derived from random forest models trained on 127 annotated underwater lakebed videos distributed across the study area. A second independent set of annotated underwater videos were used to assess the accuracy of model predictions for substrate subclass and biotic community. Overall class accuracies for substrate subsclass and biotic community are 80% and 74%, respectively. When accuracy is calculated proportional to class area, the accuracies are 83% and 80%, respectively. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN>Geoforms were classified by interpretation of substrate prediction and remote sensing data by a mapping expert. No accuracy was quantified for geoforms since their scale is larger than the footprint of available in situ video annotations.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><DIV><P><SPAN>This group of layers contains fish data from USGS surveys and a report of historical fish spawning sites.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This shapefile contains lines that locate the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) fishing bottom trawl paths between Sand Island and Bark Point, Lake Superior. The BEG_LATTITUDE_DD and BEG_LONGITUDE_DD fields are the beginning points of the trawl, where the trawl hit the bottom of the lake. The END_LATTITUDE_DD and BEG_LONGITUDE_DD fields are the end of the trawl path, where the trawl was lifted off the bottom of the lake and was brought back on the ship. The data here represent the period from 1983 to 2020. The data source is https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/57e185c8e4b0908250033a54. For more information on this data, contact Mark Vinson (mvinson@usgs.gov). Data were cleaned, and shapefile was created by Ayman Mabrouk (ayman.mabrouk@noaa.gov)</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This point shapefile contains information on the locations of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) fishing bottom trawl between Sand Island and Bark Point, Lake Superior, from 1973-2020. Additionally, it lists the fish species (common and scientific names) collected from the bottom trawling at each location. The points in this shapefile represent the centroids of the fishing bottom trawling paths. The data source is https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/57e185c8e4b0908250033a54. For more information on this data, contact Mark Vinson (mvinson@usgs.gov). The shapefile was created by Ayman Mabrouk (ayman.mabrouk@noaa.gov)</SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This shapefile contains polygons that locate the historic fish spawning ground in the Wisconsin waters of Lake Superior as part of compiling the existing ground-truthing, fisheries, and habitats data for the Apostle Islands mapping project. These spawning grounds were digitized from the atlas "Fish Spawning Grounds in Wisconsin Waters of the Great Lakes." by Coberly and Horrall 1980, Marine Studies Centers, University of Wisconsin Madison. The atlas located 11 commercial native fish species based on interviews with the fishermen of the area. The study was part of the efforts to restore the Great Lakes native fish populations. The shapefile attributes have information on the fish spawning grounds, including; the site name, shape length, shape area, common name, chart name, and area number. Six fish species were found to have spawning grounds in the Wisconsin-Lake Superior water. These species are Burbot, Lake Herring, Lake Trout, Lake Whitefish, Menominee Whitefish, and Yellow Perch. The charts in the atlas were prepared by Jana Fothergill from the University of Wisconsin and digitized from the atlas by Ayman Mabrouk (ayman.mabrouk@noaa.gov)</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><P><SPAN>This group of layers contains a various geological datasets sourced from the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey.</SPAN></P></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This dataset is a digital version of a map titled Pleistocene Geology of Superior Region, Wisconsin, originally published as plate 1 of Pleistocene Geology of Superior Region, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey Information Circular 46, by Lee Clayton, 1985. Data can be accessed and metadata retrieved from https://wgnhs.wisc.edu/catalog/publication/000296/resource/ic46di</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This dataset is a digital version of a map titled Pleistocene Geology of Superior Region, Wisconsin, originally published as plate 1 of Pleistocene Geology of Superior Region, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey Information Circular 46, by Lee Clayton, 1985. Data can be accessed and metadata retrieved from https://wgnhs.wisc.edu/catalog/publication/000296/resource/ic46di</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS)
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This dataset is a digital version of a map titled Pleistocene Geology of Superior Region, Wisconsin, originally published as plate 1 of Pleistocene Geology of Superior Region, Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey Information Circular 46, by Lee Clayton, 1985. Data can be accessed and metadata retrieved from https://wgnhs.wisc.edu/catalog/publication/000296/resource/ic46di</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS)
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: left Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 10 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>This group layer contains a collection of lakebed bathymetry and elevation layers from various data sources.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><P><SPAN>During July-September 2020, Cardinal Point Captains (CPC) hydrographers conducted hydrographic survey operations in three survey areas located on the western side of Bayfield Peninsula in southwestern Lake Superior. Survey operations took place over three legs: Leg 1 (7/25-8/5), Leg 2 (8/25-9/2), and Leg 3 (9/16-9/28). CPC utilized the Research Vessel (R/V) Echo, which was equipped with a Teledyne-Reson SeaBat 7125 multibeam echosounder for simultaneously acquiring bathymetry and acoustic backscatter imagery. During survey operations, DEA provided remote technical support to assist CPC with vessel setup, system calibrations, and initial hydrographic data testing and quality control, and coordinated transfers of raw hydrographic data. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>After initial data assessments were complete, the raw multibeam data were prepared for import into CARIS Hydrographic Information Processing System (HIPS) software (version 11.3.8). Upon import into CARIS HIPS software, the raw multibeam data were converted from native Teledyne-Reson s7k file format into CARIS HDCS format. The converted multibeam data were stored logically by survey day. Soundings with a Reson quality flag of 0 or 1 (indicating poor brightness and/or collinearity of data) were rejected automatically on import. These soundings were reviewed later during manual inspection. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>A CARIS HIPS Vessel File (HVF), which stored sensor offsets for the survey vessel, was constructed using values for the Echo as provided and documented by CPC hydrographers. Multibeam patch test data (conducted 7/25/2020) were analyzed and alignment corrections were calculated and applied to soundings. Vessel attitude (heading, pitch, roll, heave) and position data (global navigation satellite system (GNSS) corrections) were manually reviewed and verified. Applanix POSPac software was used to calculate Smoothed Best Estimate of Trajectory (SBET) files, which combined the vessel attitude and position data to produce a corrected horizontal position solution and to extract ellipsoidally referenced heights. Soundings were converted from ellipsoid heights (North American Datum of 1983; NAD83) to the project vertical datum (North American Vertical Datum of 1988; NAVD88) in CARIS HIPS using the GEOID12B model. Sound speed profiles were incorporated to correct multibeam slant range measurements and compensate for refraction in the water column. Sound speed profiles were imported into CARIS HIPS and applied to soundings using the “closest in distance and time” function. Static draft measurements were conducted periodically during hydrographic survey operations. Draft measurements were used to compute Global Positioning System (GPS) tides relative to the ellipsoid and to obtain an approximate waterline for the application of sound speed profiles. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>After position, motion, waterline, and sound velocity corrections were applied, soundings were gridded for review and directed editing. Preliminary grid resolution was 2 meters (m). Review of bathymetric data was conducted by reviewing multiple bathymetry child layers (e.g. standard deviation, density) in CARIS HIPS and using editing and QC tools to view and edit erroneous soundings (“fliers”), systematic biases, timing errors, or alignment offsets. Upon completion of directed editing, soundings were gridded at 2m and interpolated using the ArcGIS Focal Statistics tool for geospatial analysis. A final surface was generated from the interpolated results for the NCCOS Apostle Island Digital Atlas. Soundings were converted again from the NAVD88 projection to the IGLD85 projection using NOAA Vdatum v4.3. Once the data was projected to IGLD85, the surface was converted from projected height above sea level to the Lake Superior Water Level Datum from July - September, 2020. The average IGLD85 Lake Level height obtained from the GLERL Great Lakes Dashboard (https://www.glerl.noaa.gov/data/dashboard/GLD_HTML5.html) for July - September, 2020 was 183.86 m above sea level. Using the ESRI Raster Calculator, the IGLD85 elevations were subtracted by the GLERL Lake Superior water level. The result is a water depth model relative to the shoreline of Lake Superior (0m) as the base height. </SPAN></P></DIV>
Copyright Text: David Evans and Associates Inc. (DEA), Woolpert, Inc., Cardinal Point Captains (CPC), National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Great Lakes Research Initiative (GLRI).
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>During July-September 2020, Cardinal Point Captains (CPC) hydrographers conducted hydrographic survey operations in three survey areas located on the western side of Bayfield Peninsula in southwestern Lake Superior. Survey operations took place over three legs: Leg 1 (7/25-8/5), Leg 2 (8/25-9/2), and Leg 3 (9/16-9/28). CPC utilized the Research Vessel (R/V) Echo, which was equipped with a Teledyne-Reson SeaBat 7125 multibeam echosounder for simultaneously acquiring bathymetry and acoustic backscatter imagery. During survey operations, DEA provided remote technical support to assist CPC with vessel setup, system calibrations, and initial hydrographic data testing and quality control, and coordinated transfers of raw hydrographic data. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>After initial data assessments were complete, the raw multibeam data were prepared for import into CARIS Hydrographic Information Processing System (HIPS) software (version 11.3.8). Upon import into CARIS HIPS software, the raw multibeam data were converted from native Teledyne-Reson s7k file format into CARIS HDCS format. The converted multibeam data were stored logically by survey day. Soundings with a Reson quality flag of 0 or 1 (indicating poor brightness and/or collinearity of data) were rejected automatically on import. These soundings were reviewed later during manual inspection. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>A CARIS HIPS Vessel File (HVF), which stored sensor offsets for the survey vessel, was constructed using values for the Echo as provided and documented by CPC hydrographers. Multibeam patch test data (conducted 7/25/2020) were analyzed and alignment corrections were calculated and applied to soundings. Vessel attitude (heading, pitch, roll, heave) and position data (global navigation satellite system (GNSS) corrections) were manually reviewed and verified. Applanix POSPac software was used to calculate Smoothed Best Estimate of Trajectory (SBET) files, which combined the vessel attitude and position data to produce a corrected horizontal position solution and to extract ellipsoidally referenced heights. Soundings were converted from ellipsoid heights (North American Datum of 1983; NAD83) to the project vertical datum (North American Vertical Datum of 1988; NAVD88) in CARIS HIPS using the GEOID12B model. Sound speed profiles were incorporated to correct multibeam slant range measurements and compensate for refraction in the water column. Sound speed profiles were imported into CARIS HIPS and applied to soundings using the “closest in distance and time” function. Static draft measurements were conducted periodically during hydrographic survey operations. Draft measurements were used to compute Global Positioning System (GPS) tides relative to the ellipsoid and to obtain an approximate waterline for the application of sound speed profiles. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>After position, motion, waterline, and sound velocity corrections were applied, soundings were gridded for review and directed editing. Preliminary grid resolution was 2 meters (m). Review of bathymetric data was conducted by reviewing multiple bathymetry child layers (e.g. standard deviation, density) in CARIS HIPS and using editing and QC tools to view and edit erroneous soundings (“fliers”), systematic biases, timing errors, or alignment offsets. Upon completion of directed editing, soundings were gridded at 2m and interpolated using the ArcGIS Focal Statistics tool for geospatial analysis. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: David Evans and Associates Inc. (DEA), Woolpert, Inc., Cardinal Point Captains (CPC), National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Great Lakes Research Initiative (GLRI).
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN><SPAN>These data were created as part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office for Coastal Management's efforts to create an online mapping viewer called the NOAA Lake Level Viewer. It depicts potential lake level rise and fall and its associated impacts on the nation's coastal areas. The purpose of the mapping viewer is to provide coastal managers and scientists with a preliminary look at lake level change, coastal flooding impacts, and exposed lakeshore. The viewer is a screening-level tool that uses nationally consistent data sets and analyses. Data and maps provided can be used at several scales to help gauge trends and prioritize actions for different scenarios. The NOAA Lake Level Viewer may be accessed at: https://coast.noaa.gov/llv.</SPAN></SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN><SPAN> </SPAN></SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN><SPAN> This metadata record describes the Lake Superior digital elevation model (DEM), which is a part of a series of DEMs produced for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office for Coastal Management's Lake Level Viewer described above. This DEM includes the best available lidar, US Army Corps of Engineer dredge surveys, and National Park Service multibeam data known to exist at the time of DEM creation that met project specifications. This DEM includes data for Alger, Baraga, Chippewa, Gogebic, Houghton, Keweenaw, Luce, Marquette, and Ontonagon counties in Michigan; Cook, Lake, and St. Louis counties in Minnesota; and Ashland, Bayfield, Douglas, and Iron counties in Wisconsin.</SPAN></SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN><SPAN> </SPAN></SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN><SPAN> The DEM was produced from the following lidar data sets:</SPAN></SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN><SPAN> 1. 2007, USACE NCMP Topobathy Lidar: Lake Superior (Apostle Islands) and Lake Ontario (NY, WI)</SPAN></SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN> 2. 2008, USACE NCMP Topobathy Lidar: Lake Superior (Wisconsin and Michigan)</SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN> 3. 2010, EPA Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) Bathymetric Lidar: Lake Superior (MI, MN, WI)</SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN /></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN>The DEM is referenced vertically to the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88) with vertical units of meters and horizontally to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83). The resolution of the DEM is approximately 3 meters.</SPAN></P></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>Bathymetry of Lake Superior has been compiled as a component of a NOAA project to rescue Great Lakes lake floor geological and geophysical data and make it more accessible to the public. This project is a cooperative effort between investigators at the NOAA National Geophysical Data Center's Marine Geology and Geophysics Division (NGDC/MGG), the NOAA Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory (GLERL) and the Canadian Hydrographic Service(CHS). Bathymetric data have been collected from the Great Lakes in support of nautical charting for at least 150 years by the US Army Corp. of Engineers (before 1970), the NOAA National Ocean Service (NOS)(after 1970), and the Canadian Hydrographic Service. No time frame has been set for completing bathymetric contours of Lake Superior, though a 3 arc-second (~90 meter cell size) grid is available. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: NOAA Great Lakes Environmental Research Lab
NOAA National Ocean Service
Canadian Hydrographic Service
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><DIV><P><SPAN>This group of layers contains a collection of lakebed surface layers derived from high resolution bathymetry</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>During July-September 2020, Cardinal Point Captains (CPC) hydrographers conducted hydrographic survey operations in three survey areas located on the western side of Bayfield Peninsula in southwestern Lake Superior. Survey operations took place over three legs: Leg 1 (7/25-8/5), Leg 2 (8/25-9/2), and Leg 3 (9/16-9/28). CPC utilized the Research Vessel (R/V) Echo, which was equipped with a Teledyne-Reson SeaBat 7125 multibeam echosounder for simultaneously acquiring bathymetry and acoustic backscatter imagery. During survey operations, DEA provided remote technical support to assist CPC with vessel setup, system calibrations, and initial hydrographic data testing and quality control, and coordinated transfers of raw hydrographic data.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>After initial data assessments were complete, the raw multibeam data were prepared for import into CARIS Hydrographic Information Processing System (HIPS) software (version 11.3.8). Upon import into CARIS HIPS software, the raw multibeam data were converted from native Teledyne-Reson s7k file format into CARIS HDCS format. The converted multibeam data were stored logically by survey day.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN>After position, motion, waterline, and sound velocity corrections were applied, soundings were gridded for review and directed editing. Preliminary grid resolution was 2 meters (m). Review of bathymetric data was conducted by reviewing multiple bathymetry child layers (e.g. standard deviation, density) in CARIS HIPS and using editing and QC tools to view and edit erroneous soundings (“fliers”), systematic biases, timing errors, or alignment offsets. Upon completion of directed editing, soundings were gridded at 2m and interpolated using the ArcGIS Focal Statistics tool for geospatial analysis. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Great Lakes Research Initiative (GLRI).
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>During July-September 2020, Cardinal Point Captains (CPC) hydrographers conducted hydrographic survey operations in three survey areas located on the western side of Bayfield Peninsula in southwestern Lake Superior. Survey operations took place over three legs: Leg 1 (7/25-8/5), Leg 2 (8/25-9/2), and Leg 3 (9/16-9/28). CPC utilized the Research Vessel (R/V) </SPAN><SPAN STYLE="font-style:italic;"><SPAN>Echo</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>, which was equipped with a Teledyne-Reson SeaBat 7125 multibeam echosounder for simultaneously acquiring bathymetry and acoustic backscatter imagery. During survey operations, DEA provided remote technical support to assist CPC with vessel setup, system calibrations, and initial hydrographic data testing and quality control, and coordinated transfers of raw hydrographic data. </SPAN></SPAN></P><P><SPAN /><SPAN /></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN>After initial data assessments were complete, the raw multibeam data were prepared for import into CARIS Hydrographic Information Processing System (HIPS) software (version 11.3.8). Upon import into CARIS HIPS software, the raw multibeam data were converted from native Teledyne-Reson s7k file format into CARIS HDCS format. The converted multibeam data were stored logically by survey day. </SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN /><SPAN /></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN>After position, motion, waterline, and sound velocity corrections were applied, soundings were gridded for review and directed editing. Preliminary grid resolution was 2 meters (m). Review of bathymetric data was conducted by reviewing multiple bathymetry child layers (e.g. standard deviation, density) in CARIS HIPS and using editing and QC tools to view and edit erroneous soundings (“fliers”), systematic biases, timing errors, or alignment offsets. Upon completion of directed editing, soundings were gridded at 2m and interpolated using the ArcGIS Focal Statistics tool for geospatial analysis. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>Acoustic backscatter mosaics are an important piece of information when characterizing surficial seafloor features and delineating benthic habitats.</SPAN><SPAN> After completion of bathymetric data processing, review, and analysis, multibeam backscatter imagery processing was conducted using Quality Positioning Systems (QPS) Fledermaus Geocoder Toolbox (FMGT) software (version 7.9.3). Processed bathymetry data files were exported from CARIS HIPS as Generic Sensor Format (GSF) files. The FMGT workflow paired each native sonar file (Teledyne-Reson s7k format) with its processed GSF file, thus incorporating corrected position and motion data. A beam pattern correction was computed and applied to remove angular bias from the backscatter imagery. Angle Varying Gain (AVG) was applied using the standard “Flat” algorithm and window size of 300 pings. A backscatter imagery mosaic was produced using standard line weighting procedures. The backscatter mosaic was then reviewed manually for motion artifacts and/or brightness offsets. Manual editing was performed to adjust brightness values between adjacent survey lines and/or survey days using the “Head Bias” tool in QPS FMGT software. After the completion of backscatter data processing and quality review, final backscatter image mosaics were produced with pixel resolutions of 1m (as per project specifications) and 2m (Figure 4), the recommended product resolution based on sounding density. The backscatter imagery mosaics were exported in Geotiff format. The backscatter imagery mosaics are referenced to NAD83 UTM Zone 15 North with horizontal units in meters. Backscatter intensity is shown in logarithmic units of decibels (dB). </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: David Evans and Associates Inc. (DEA), Woolpert, Inc., Cardinal Point Captains (CPC), National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Great Lakes Research Initiative (GLRI).
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><P><SPAN>During July-September 2020, Cardinal Point Captains (CPC) hydrographers conducted hydrographic survey operations in three survey areas located on the western side of Bayfield Peninsula in southwestern Lake Superior. Survey operations took place over three legs: Leg 1 (7/25-8/5), Leg 2 (8/25-9/2), and Leg 3 (9/16-9/28). CPC utilized the Research Vessel (R/V) </SPAN><SPAN STYLE="font-style:italic;"><SPAN>Echo</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>, which was equipped with a Teledyne-Reson SeaBat 7125 multibeam echosounder for simultaneously acquiring bathymetry and acoustic backscatter imagery. During survey operations, DEA provided remote technical support to assist CPC with vessel setup, system calibrations, and initial hydrographic data testing and quality control, and coordinated transfers of raw hydrographic data. </SPAN></SPAN></P><P><SPAN /><SPAN /></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN>After initial data assessments were complete, the raw multibeam data were prepared for import into CARIS Hydrographic Information Processing System (HIPS) software (version 11.3.8). Upon import into CARIS HIPS software, the raw multibeam data were converted from native Teledyne-Reson s7k file format into CARIS HDCS format. The converted multibeam data were stored logically by survey day. </SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN /><SPAN /></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN>After position, motion, waterline, and sound velocity corrections were applied, soundings were gridded for review and directed editing. Preliminary grid resolution was 2 meters (m). Review of bathymetric data was conducted by reviewing multiple bathymetry child layers (e.g. standard deviation, density) in CARIS HIPS and using editing and QC tools to view and edit erroneous soundings (“fliers”), systematic biases, timing errors, or alignment offsets. Upon completion of directed editing, soundings were gridded at 2m and interpolated using the ArcGIS Focal Statistics tool for geospatial analysis. Standard deviation of depth is the dispersion of water depth values about the mean in a 3 x 3 cell neighborhood.</SPAN></P></DIV>
Copyright Text: National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Great Lakes Research Initiative (GLRI).
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>During July-September 2020, Cardinal Point Captains (CPC) hydrographers conducted hydrographic survey operations in three survey areas located on the western side of Bayfield Peninsula in southwestern Lake Superior. Survey operations took place over three legs: Leg 1 (7/25-8/5), Leg 2 (8/25-9/2), and Leg 3 (9/16-9/28). CPC utilized the Research Vessel (R/V) </SPAN><SPAN STYLE="font-style:italic;"><SPAN>Echo</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>, which was equipped with a Teledyne-Reson SeaBat 7125 multibeam echosounder for simultaneously acquiring bathymetry and acoustic backscatter imagery. During survey operations, DEA provided remote technical support to assist CPC with vessel setup, system calibrations, and initial hydrographic data testing and quality control, and coordinated transfers of raw hydrographic data. </SPAN></SPAN></P><P><SPAN /><SPAN /></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN>After initial data assessments were complete, the raw multibeam data were prepared for import into CARIS Hydrographic Information Processing System (HIPS) software (version 11.3.8). Upon import into CARIS HIPS software, the raw multibeam data were converted from native Teledyne-Reson s7k file format into CARIS HDCS format. The converted multibeam data were stored logically by survey day. </SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN /><SPAN /></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN>After position, motion, waterline, and sound velocity corrections were applied, soundings were gridded for review and directed editing. Preliminary grid resolution was 2 meters (m). Review of bathymetric data was conducted by reviewing multiple bathymetry child layers (e.g. standard deviation, density) in CARIS HIPS and using editing and QC tools to view and edit erroneous soundings (“fliers”), systematic biases, timing errors, or alignment offsets. Upon completion of directed editing, soundings were gridded at 2m and interpolated using the ArcGIS Focal Statistics tool for geospatial analysis. Slope was derived from this surface using the slope calculator, a function of ESRI's Spatial Analyst extension.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: David Evans and Associates, Inc. (DEA), Woolpert Inc., National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Great Lakes Research Initiative (GLRI).
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;font-size:12pt"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>During July-September 2020, Cardinal Point Captains (CPC) hydrographers conducted hydrographic survey operations in three survey areas located on the western side of Bayfield Peninsula in southwestern Lake Superior. Survey operations took place over three legs: Leg 1 (7/25-8/5), Leg 2 (8/25-9/2), and Leg 3 (9/16-9/28). CPC utilized the Research Vessel (R/V) </SPAN><SPAN STYLE="font-style:italic;"><SPAN>Echo</SPAN></SPAN><SPAN><SPAN>, which was equipped with a Teledyne-Reson SeaBat 7125 multibeam echosounder for simultaneously acquiring bathymetry and acoustic backscatter imagery. During survey operations, DEA provided remote technical support to assist CPC with vessel setup, system calibrations, and initial hydrographic data testing and quality control, and coordinated transfers of raw hydrographic data. </SPAN></SPAN></P><P><SPAN /><SPAN /></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN>After initial data assessments were complete, the raw multibeam data were prepared for import into CARIS Hydrographic Information Processing System (HIPS) software (version 11.3.8). Upon import into CARIS HIPS software, the raw multibeam data were converted from native Teledyne-Reson s7k file format into CARIS HDCS format. The converted multibeam data were stored logically by survey day. </SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN /><SPAN /></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN>After position, motion, waterline, and sound velocity corrections were applied, soundings were gridded for review and directed editing. Preliminary grid resolution was 2 meters (m). Review of bathymetric data was conducted by reviewing multiple bathymetry child layers (e.g. standard deviation, density) in CARIS HIPS and using editing and QC tools to view and edit erroneous soundings (“fliers”), systematic biases, timing errors, or alignment offsets. Upon completion of directed editing, soundings were gridded at 2m and interpolated using the ArcGIS Focal Statistics tool for geospatial analysis. </SPAN></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN /></P><P STYLE="margin:0 0 0 0;"><SPAN>The ESRI grid of source bathymetry was input into the Rugosity Builder Tool, a component of the ArcGIS Benthic Terrain Modeler (BTM). The BTM tool, a collection of ArcGIS terrain visualization tools developed by the Oregon State University (OSU) Department of Geosciences and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center, calculated the rugosity of that bathymetric grid based on an algorithm developed by Jeff Jenness. A short summary of the process, quoted directly from the BTM's documentation, is as follows: "...rugosity derivation relies, in part, on a neighborhood analysis using a 4 grid cell by 4 grid cell neighborhood. An algorithm is passed through the Raster Map Algebra Operation object within Spatial Analyst that calculates the planar distance between the center point of the center cell and of each of the eight surrounding cells in the neighborhood. Next, using the Pythagorean Theorem, the surface distance is calculated for each planar distance using the difference in elevation between the cells. The result of this function is sixteen separate grid data sets with each cell value equal to this surface distance. The next step in the process is to calculate the area formed by three adjacent sides. The result is eight triangular surface area grids. These grid datasets are combined to obtain a surface area data set for the input bathymetric data set. The final step in the process is to create a data set that represents the ratio of surface area to planar area. This final data set represents rugosity for the study area." More information on the specific algorithms used, and contact points for questions, can be found in the BTM's documentation. Rugosity values near 1 represent flat smooth terrain, while higher values reflect increasing rugosity or terrain roughness.</SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Great Lakes Research Initiative (GLRI).
Description: <DIV STYLE="text-align:Left;"><DIV><DIV><P><SPAN>During July-September 2020, Cardinal Point Captains (CPC) hydrographers conducted hydrographic survey operations in three survey areas located on the western side of Bayfield Peninsula in southwestern Lake Superior. Survey operations took place over three legs: Leg 1 (7/25-8/5), Leg 2 (8/25-9/2), and Leg 3 (9/16-9/28). CPC utilized the Research Vessel (R/V) Echo, which was equipped with a Teledyne-Reson SeaBat 7125 multibeam echosounder for simultaneously acquiring bathymetry and acoustic backscatter imagery. During survey operations, DEA provided remote technical support to assist CPC with vessel setup, system calibrations, and initial hydrographic data testing and quality control, and coordinated transfers of raw hydrographic data.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>After initial data assessments were complete, the raw multibeam data were prepared for import into CARIS Hydrographic Information Processing System (HIPS) software (version 11.3.8). Upon import into CARIS HIPS software, the raw multibeam data were converted from native Teledyne-Reson s7k file format into CARIS HDCS format. The converted multibeam data were stored logically by survey day.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>After position, motion, waterline, and sound velocity corrections were applied, soundings were gridded for review and directed editing. Preliminary grid resolution was 2 meters (m). Review of bathymetric data was conducted by reviewing multiple bathymetry child layers (e.g. standard deviation, density) in CARIS HIPS and using editing and QC tools to view and edit erroneous soundings (“fliers”), systematic biases, timing errors, or alignment offsets. Upon completion of directed editing, soundings were gridded at 2m and interpolated using the ArcGIS Focal Statistics tool for geospatial analysis. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>The geoform model was created using the Bathymetry and Reflectivity-based Estimator of Seafloor Segments (BRESS) Tool (https://www.hydroffice.org/bress/rationale/) from the NOAA Pydro Office Suite of applications. The software was used to interpret the geomorphological complexity of the study area.. A 2 meter resolution multibeam bathymetric surface was used as an input for the BRESS tool. The backscatter reflectivity surface of the study area could not be used for the BRESS Tool because the imagery was uncalibrated and contained several major decibel offsets.</SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>NCCOS used 30 model training sites which contained several distinct and heterogeneous lakebed features to explore and test the performance of the tool settings. The inner radius, outer radius, and flatness angle settings of the tool were tested on these subsets to train the model in delineating the geoform types. The final settings chosen for the study area were: inner radius = 5 nodes, outer radius = 50 nodes, and flatness angle = 1 degree. The final geoform analysis detected 6 types of geoform classes: Flat, Ridge, Shoulder, Slope Footslope, and Valley. </SPAN></P><P><SPAN /></P><P><SPAN>The final image was exported as a Geotif into ArcGIS Pro and classified according to the 6 separate geoform classes. A layer file with the color codes and class labels was also exported from ArcGIS, and is provided in the web tile version in the service definition file. </SPAN></P></DIV></DIV></DIV>
Copyright Text: NOAA/NCCOS Ayman Mabrouk and Will Sautter