Bering-Okhotsk Seal Survey (BOSS) Identified Hot Spots (2012-13)

US surveys were conducted of the Bering Sea pack ice for bearded, spotted, ribbon, and ringed seals using digital cameras and thermal imagers mounted in the belly ports of two fixed-wing aircraft from 6 April to 23 May 2012 and 4 April to 9 May 2013. U.S. flights were flown at a target altitude of 1,000 ft (300 m) to maximize the area surveyed while maintaining the required imaging resolution and minimizing the chance of disturbance to seals and other wildlife. A NOAA Twin Otter (N56RF) aircraft housed three FLIR SC645 thermal imagers, which recorded continuous data in the 7.5-13.0 µm wavelength. Each thermal imager was paired with a Canon Mark III 1Ds digital single-lens reflex camera fitted with a 100-mm Zeiss lens. All six instruments were mounted in an open-air belly port. The combined thermal swath width was approximately 1,500 ft (470 m) at an altitude of 1,000 ft. A contracted Aero Commander aircraft carried two sets of paired thermal imagers (SC645) and digital SLR cameras (Nikon D3X) and surveyed a maximum swath width of approximately 900 ft (280 m). Color cameras collected images at a 1-1.2 second interval. In 2013 the two aircraft flew a total of 36 surveys covering more than 17,000 nmi (32,090 km) of trackline and collected about 913,000 images. Combined with the 2012 survey effort, the U.S. BOSS team covered 31,000 nmi of trackline and collected 1.8 million images.

Moreland, E.M, M.F. Cameron, S.P. Dahle, J.M. Ver Hoef, P. Conn, B. McClintock, J.K. Jansen, J.M. London, E.L. Richmond, K.M. Yano, G.M. Brady and P.L Boveng (2015): Bering-Okhotsk Seal Survey (BOSS) Identified Hot Spots (2012-13). Alaska Fisheries Science Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. --doi:TBD, contact authors for updated citation details--

While every effort has been made to ensure that these data are accurate and reliable within the limits of the current state of the art, NOAA cannot assume liability for any damages caused by any errors or omissions in the data, nor as a result of the failure of the data to function on a particular system. NOAA makes no warranty, expressed or implied, nor does the fact of distribution constitute such a warranty.

The data set is in the process of being archived with the NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. Once the archival process is complete and verified, the data set will be publicly available. Acknowledge NOAA/NMFS/AFSC as the source from which these data were obtained in any publications and/or other representations of these data. Communication and collaboration with dataset authors is strongly encouraged prior to use.

The data set is in the process of being archived with the NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. Once the archival process is complete and verified, the data set will be publicly available.

The data set is in the process of being archived with the NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. Once the archival process is complete and verified, the data set will be publicly available.

User must read and fully comprehend the metadata prior to use. Applications or inferences derived from the data should be carefully considered for accuracy. While every effort has been made to ensure that these data are accurate and reliable within the limits of the current state of the art, NOAA cannot assume liability for any damages caused by any errors or omissions in the data, nor as a result of the failure of the data to function on a particular system. NOAA makes no warranty, expressed or implied, nor does the fact of distribution constitute such a warranty. Acknowledge NOAA/NMFS/AFSC or the specified citation as the source from which these data were obtained in any publications and/or other representations of these data. Communication and collaboration with dataset authors is strongly encouraged.

no metadata access constraints

Metadata are subject to revision at any time and information within the metadata record should not be cited without author consent. While every effort has been made to ensure that these data are accurate and reliable within the limits of the current state of the art, NOAA cannot assume liability for any damages caused by any errors or omissions in the data, nor as a result of the failure of the data to function on a particular system. NOAA makes no warranty, expressed or implied, nor does the fact of distribution constitute such a warranty.

Both detection techniques were tested against 70 seal groups identified by a manual review of 11,724 color images. The "manual" thermal method detects 94% of these seals and "Skeyes 2.0" custom software detects 98%. Additionally, seal detection consistency across the thermal ground swath was confirmed using DISTANCE analysis of hot spots from survey center-line.

These data have not been checked for accuracy or completeness at this point. File name accuracy (time, camera position, flight info) is complete and cuing/disturbance response was measured in flight.

data are not automatically processed

IT Security and Contingency Plan for the system establishes procedures and applies to the functions, operations, and resources necessary to recover and restore data as hosted in the Western Regional Support Center in Seattle, Washington, following a disruption.

Hot spots that may be seals were detected in thermal video files using one of two methods. The "manual" method involved evaluating the maximum pixel temperature of each video frame and applying a temperature threshold to identify frames the evaluate for hot spots that may be seals. The "Skeyes 2.0" method involved post-processing the video files with custom software that extracts frames with hot spots identified by an outlier algorithm.