Coastal Bend Texas Benthic Habitat Mapping Patchy Shapefile Map - San Antonio Bay and Espiritu Santo Bay (NODC Accession 0070784)

Frequently anticipated questions:

• What does this data set describe?
  1. How might this data set be cited?
  2. What geographic area does the data set cover?
  3. What does it look like?
  4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?
  5. What is the general form of this data set?
  6. How does the data set represent geographic features?
  7. How does the data set describe geographic features?
• Who produced the data set?
  1. Who are the originators of the data set?
  2. Who also contributed to the data set?
  3. To whom should users address questions about the data?
• Why was the data set created?
• How was the data set created?
  1. From what previous works were the data drawn?
  2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?
  3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?
• How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?
  1. How well have the observations been checked?
  2. How accurate are the geographic locations?
  3. How accurate are the heights or depths?
  4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?
  5. How consistent are the relationships among the data, including topology?
• How can someone get a copy of the data set?
  1. Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?
  2. Who distributes the data?
  3. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set?
  4. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?
  5. How can I download or order the data?
• Who wrote the metadata?

What does this data set describe?

1. How might this data set be cited?
   Department of Commerce (DOC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service (NOS), Coastal Services Center (CSC), 20090213, Coastal Bend Texas Benthic Habitat Mapping Patchy Shapefile Map - San Antonio Bay and Espiritu Santo Bay (NODC Accession 0070784): NOAA's Ocean Service, Coastal Services Center (CSC), Charleston, SC.

   Online Links:

   • https://accession.nodc.noaa.gov/0070784
   • https://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/data/benthiccover
   • https://coast.noaa.gov/

2. What geographic area does the data set cover?

   West_Bounding_Coordinate: -096.807954

   East_Bounding_Coordinate: -096.336526

   North_Bounding_Coordinate: +28.456812

   South_Bounding_Coordinate: +28.189011

3. What does it look like?
4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?

   Calendar_Date: 13-Feb-2009

   Currentness_Reference: Publication Date

5. What is the general form of this data set?

   Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: map

6. How does the data set represent geographic features?
   1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?
      
   2. What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?
      

      Grid_Coordinate_System_Name: Universal Transverse Mercator

      Universal_Transverse_Mercator:

      UTM_Zone_Number: 14

      Transverse_Mercator:

      Scale_Factor_at_Central_Meridian: 0.999600

      Longitude_of_Central_Meridian: -099.000000

      Latitude_of_Projection_Origin: +00.000000

      False_Easting: 500000.000000

      False_Northing: 0.000000

      Planar coordinates are encoded using coordinate pair
      Abscissae (x-coordinates) are specified to the nearest 2.000000
      Ordinates (y-coordinates) are specified to the nearest 2.000000
      Planar coordinates are specified in Meters
      The horizontal datum used is North American Datum of 1983.
      The ellipsoid used is Geodetic Reference System 80.
      The semi-major axis of the ellipsoid used is 6378137.000000000000000000.
      The flattening of the ellipsoid used is 1/298.257222096042310000.
      
7. How does the data set describe geographic features?

   Entity_and_Attribute_Overview: None

   Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation: Not applicable

Who produced the data set?

1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)
   • Department of Commerce (DOC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service (NOS), Coastal Services Center (CSC)
2. Who also contributed to the data set?

   NOAA Coastal Services Center

3. To whom should users address questions about the data?
   Fugro EarthData, Inc.

   Attn: Becky Jordan

   Project Manager

   7320 Executive Way

   Frederick, MD
   

   USA

   301-948-8550 (voice)

   301-963-2064 (FAX)

   bjordan@earthdata.com

   Hours_of_Service: 9:00am - 5:00pm

Why was the data set created?

The NOAA CSC worked cooperatively with the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department (TPWD) and the Texas A and M University, Corpus Christi, Center for Coastal Studies to have benthic habitat data, primarily submerged aquatic vegetation, created for eight bay systems along the southern Texas coast. This project, the phase 2 project,consists of the two remaining bay systems, Lower Laguna Madre and San Antonio/Espiritu Santo Bays. This benthic habitat data will support the recently adopted Texas Seagrass Monitoring Program which calls for the monitoring of seagrass beds along the Texas coast for assessment of status and trends.

How was the data set created?

1. From what previous works were the data drawn?

   Digital Orthoimagery (source 1 of 1)

   Sanborn Map Company, Inc., 20080310, San Antonio Espiritu Santo Bay Digital Orthoimagery.

   Type_of_Source_Media: Digital

   Source_Contribution:

   The orthoimagery was produced by Sanborn Map Company, Inc. for NOAA. The imagery for the San Antonio Espiritu Santo Bay project was acquired on December 5,2007 and the orthoimagery and horizontal analysis was completed on January 28, 2007.

2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?

   Date: 10-Feb-2009 (process 1 of 1)

   The original 1m DOQQs for the project area were resampled to 2m and mosaicked into a single four-band image. Image segmentation was performed using Definiens Professional. The classification of the habitat segments(as ESRI polygon shapefiles) was performed using CART analysis. The habitat map was refined with the aid of field data collected during May and July of 2008. The final habitat shapefile clipped to the final project area boundary. Each polygon has a unique polygon identification number in the attribute table (field"POLY_ID"). The final shapefile was checked for proper topology and to insure that each polygon has a correct habitat label, habitat code, modifier label if present, unique identification number, and an area calculation. Polygons below the 100m2 minimum mapping unit (MMU) were eliminated, though some polygons less than 100m2 were retained if their area changed to below the MMU due to the polygon boundary smoothing process. The habitat data also went through a independent validation review.Polygons in the habitat map labeled as Patchy SRV(seagrass) were used to mask the 2m mosaic for further classification of these areas. Pixels in the imagery falling within the Patchy SRV polygons were classified into a"percent seagrass" cover category using NDVI values.Pixels were classified into the following seagrass coverage categories:0% greater than 0-10% greater than 10-20% greater than 20-30% greater than 30-40% greater than 40-50% greater than 50-60% greater than 60-70% greater than 70-80% greater than 80-90% greater than 90%For each Patchy SRV polygon from the habitat map, the average percent seagrass coverage and standard deviation was calculated based on the coverage values of each pixel within the polygon. These data were included in the Patchy SRV shapefile attribute table. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   Fugro EarthData, Inc.

   Attn: Becky Jordan

   Project Manager

   7320 Executive Way

   Frederick, MD
   

   USA

   301-948-8550 (voice)

   301-963-2064 (FAX)

   bjordan@earthdata.com

   Hours_of_Service: 9:00am - 5:00pm

3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?

How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?

1. How well have the observations been checked?
   Horizontal accuracy of the reprocessed source imagery was verified to exceed the project specification of +/- 5meters CE95 of position on the ground.Overall habitat map final thematic map deterministic accuracy is 90% and overall fuzzy accuracy is 91%, which exceeds the contract standard of 85%. Additionally, 13 of the 14 final individual class producer's and user's deterministic accuracies exceed the contract standard of80%. The deterministic user's accuracy for emergent marsh is 76%. All of the individual class producer's and user's fuzzy accuracies exceed the contract standard of80%. Detailed error matrices can be found in the thematic accuracy report.
2. How accurate are the geographic locations?
   
3. How accurate are the heights or depths?
   
4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?
   Compliance with the accuracy standard for the imagery was ensured by the placement of photo-identifiable ground control check points.Compliance with the accuracy standard for the final map product was ensured by field checks and manual editing.
5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?
   Eight photo-identified ground control check points were established for the purpose of assessing the accuracy of the final orthoimagery. These points were randomly distributed over the San Antonio Espiritu Santo Bay area.Two of the control points fell outside the project extent,and one additional point was discarded, as it was not associated with a well-defined feature. The five remaining points were used to calculate the accuracy of the orthoimagery.For the final map product Initial Map accuracy assessment was used as a tool to prioritize areas for further field examination and after field investigation to prioritize those areas where additional modeling or interpretation was needed. Error matrices showing both deterministic and fuzzy accuracies were compiled for the initial map. Based on the results compiled from the assessment, the team visit any classes exhibiting inaccuracy and addressed the classes through modeling, additional analysis or manual editing.

How can someone get a copy of the data set?

Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?

Access_Constraints: None

Use_Constraints: None

1. Who distributes the data set? (Distributor 1 of 1)
   
   NOAA Coastal Services Center

   Attn: Clearinghouse Manager

   2234 South Hobson Avenue

   Charleston, SC
   

   USA

   843-740-1210 (voice)

   843-740-1224 (FAX)

   clearinghouse@noaa.gov

   Hours_of_Service: Monday-Friday, 8-5 EST

2. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set? Downloadable Data
3. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?

   Users must assume responsibility to determine the usability of these data.

4. How can I download or order the data?

Who wrote the metadata?

Dates:

Last modified: 25-Jul-2023

Metadata author:

NOAA Coastal Services Center

Attn: Metadata Specialist

2234 S Hobson Ave.

Charleston, SC

USA

843-740-1210 (voice)

843-740-1224 (FAX)

clearinghouse@noaa.gov

Hours_of_Service: 8:00 am to 5:00 pm EST

Metadata standard:

FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC-STD-001-1998)