Sensitivity of Coastal Environments and Wildlife to Spilled Oil: Puget Sound and Strait of Juan de Fuca, Washington: MGT (Management Area Polygons)

This data set contains polygons that represent the following sensitive human-use management areas in Puget Sound and the Strait of Juan de Fuca, Washington: aquaculture sites, commercial fishing areas, Indian reservations, marine sanctuaries, Nature Conservancy areas, national parks, recreational fishing areas, state parks, subsistence areas, wildlife refuges, and other management areas. Location-specific type and source information is stored in relational data tables (described below) designed to be used in conjunction with this spatial data layer.This data set comprises a portion of the Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) data for Puget Sound and Strait of Juan de Fuca, Washington. ESI data characterize the marine and coastal environments and wildlife by their sensitivity to spilled oil. The ESI data include information for three main components: shoreline habitats, sensitive biological resources, and human-use resources. See also the SOCECON (Socioeconomic Resource Points and Lines) data layer, part of the larger Puget Sound and Strait of Juan de Fuca ESI database, for additional human-use information.

The ESI data were collected, mapped, and digitized to provide environmental data for oil spill planning and response. The Clean Water Act with amendments by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 requires response plans for immediate and effective protection of sensitive resources.

2235

Funding was provided by Navy Region Northwest. This data set was prepared by Concurrent Technologies Corporation, Bremerton, Washington, and Sound GIS, Seattle, Washington with support from Research Planning, Inc., Columbia, South Carolina, for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service, Office of Response and Restoration, Hazardous Materials Response Division, Seattle, Washington.

Resource Description - ESI Atlas for Puget Sound and Strait of Juan de Fuca, Washington

In addition to the geographic data layers, two relational attribute or data tables, SOC_DAT and SOURCES, are used to store the complex socioeconomic data in the ESI data structure. The geographic data layer containing socioeconomic data resource information (in this case, MGT) is linked to the Socioeconomic Resources table (SOC_DAT) using the unique ID and the lookup table SOC_LUT, or it can be linked directly using HUNUM. HUNUM is a unique reference number concatenated with the atlas number (for Puget Sound and Strait of Juan de Fuca, the number is 79). ID is a unique combination of the atlas number (79), an element specific number (MGT = 11), and a unique record number. SOC_DAT and the other relational data tables are described below in detail. See the Browse_Graphic section for a link to the entity-relationship diagram, which describes the way these tables relate to the geographic data layers and other attribute tables in the ESI data structure.

Unknown

Although these data have been processed successfully on a computer system at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by NOAA regarding the utility of the data on any other system, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. NOAA warrants the delivery of this product in computer-readable format, and will offer a replacement copy of the product when the product is determined unreadable by computer-input peripherals, or when the physical medium is delivered in damaged condition.

Contact NOAA for distribution options (see Distributor). ESI data are processed into multiple formats to make them useful to a wider community of GIS/mapping users. Distribution formats include a Geodatabase; ARC export, MOSS, and Shape files; and MARPLOT map folders. An ArcMap .mxd file, an ArcView 3.x ESI project, and an ESI_Viewer product are also included on the distribution CDs for ease of use of the ESI data. The database files are distributed both in the NOAA standard relational database format (see NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 115) and in a simplified desktop flat file format. This metadata document includes information on both of these database formats.;

None

DO NOT USE MAPS FOR NAVIGATIONAL PURPOSES.Besides the above warning, there are no use constraints on these data. Note that the ESI database should not be used to the exclusion of other pertinent data or information held by state or federal agencies or other organizations. Likewise, information contained in the database cannot be used in place of consultations with environmental, natural resource, and cultural resource agencies, or in place of field surveys. Recognize that the information contained in the ESI database represents known concentration areas or occurrences of natural, cultural, and human-use resources, but does not necessarily represent the full distribution or range of each species or resource. This is particularly important to recognize when considering potential impacts to protected resources, such as endangered species, wetlands, etc. Acknowledgment of the originators, publishers, contributors, and sources listed would be appreciated in products derived from these data.

The software packages used to develop the atlas are Environmental Systems Research Institute's ARC/INFO(r) (version 9.1) and SQL SERVER(r) (version 2000). The hardware configuration is PC's with Windows Operating System (2000/XP/2003).The Spatial_Data_Organization_Information section refers only to the source files in the ARC export format. The following files are included in the data set: birds.e00, esi.e00, fish.e00, fishl.e00, habitatl.e00, habitats.e00, hydro.e00, index.e00, invert.e00, m_mampt.e00, mgt.e00, nests.e00, socecon.e00. Associated relational and desktop data tables provided in Arc export and text format are bio_lut, biofile, biores, breed, breed_dt, seasonal, soc_dat, soc_lut, sources, species, and status.

A multi-stage error checking process is used to verify both attribute accuracy and logical consistency throughout data production. The process includes a standardized data entry methodology, hardcopy data review by in-house and external resource experts, a final Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) process, and multiple automated logical consistency checks. Quantitative data (such as densities, counts, abundances, or concentrations) provided by resource experts for inclusion in the data set may vary widely in attribute accuracy, depending upon the methodology used to collect and compile such data. For a more detailed evaluation of source data attribute accuracy, contact the sources listed in the Lineage section.

Spatial components for the human-use data layers can come from expert interviews, hardcopy, or digital sources. Most of the spatial components of the human-use data layers are developed from pre-existing digital or hardcopy sources and reflect the positional accuracy of these original data. Some of the spatial components of the human-use data layers are compiled on hardcopy base maps with a scale of 1:24,000. See the Lineage and Process_Description sections for more information on the original data source and how these data were integrated or manipulated to create the final data set.

These data represent a synthesis of digital boundaries for management areas. See also the SOCECON (Socioeconomic Resource Points and Lines) data layer, part of the larger Puget Sound and Strait of Juan de Fuca, Washington ESI database, for additional human-use information. These data do not necessarily represent all management areas in Puget Sound and Strait of Juan de Fuca.

A multi-stage error checking process, described in the above Attribute_Accuracy_Report, is used to verify both attribute accuracy and logical consistency throughout data production. This process includes multiple automated logical consistency checks that test the files for missing or duplicate data, rules for proper coding, GIS topological consistencies (such as dangles, unnecessary nodes, etc.), and SQL SERVER(r) to ARC/INFO(r) consistencies. A final review is made by the GIS manager, where the data are written to CD-ROM and the metadata are written. After the data are delivered to NOAA, they are again subjected to a number of quality and consistency checks.