NOAA NCCOS Assessment: Priority Areas Recommended for Shallow Coral Reef Management in the South Florida Coast from 2021-04-26 to 2021-05-21

Point of Contact:

• LTJG Jennifer Kraus, Jennifer.kraus@noaa.gov, US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)

• NCCOS Data Manager, nccos.data@noaa.gov, NCCOS

Principal Investigator:

• LTJG Jennifer Kraus, Jennifer.kraus@noaa.gov, US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)

Additional Principal Investigator:

• Tim Battista, Tim.battista@noaa.gov, US DOC; NOAA; NOS; National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS)

Kraus, J., C. Buckel, B. Williams, C. Ames, D. Dorfman, F. Pagan, and E. Towle. 2022. NOAA NCCOS Assessment: Priority Areas Recommended for Shallow Coral Reef Management in the South Florida Coast from 2021-04-26 to 2021-05-21. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6914685

US Shallow Coral Reef Mapping Priorities Data Viewer

Browse Graphic: NCCOS

NCCOS Project Webpage: Defining Future Seafloor Mapping Priorities to Inform Shallow Coral Reef Management

Spatial Prioritization Widget: A Tool to Identify Mapping Priorities

NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 276

NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 304

An advisory group was established which included individuals from NOAA CRCP and NOAA Fisheries. This advisory team customized the pGIS process specifically to meet the needs of CRCP and local coral reef manager priorities. In the online pGIS, the study area was divided into 1761 hexagonal grid cells 10.4 km2 in size. Existing relevant spatial datasets (e.g., bathymetry, Sanctuary Protection Areas, etc.) were provided as a digital atlas to help participants understand information and data gaps within the project area and to identify locations they wanted to prioritize for future data collections. The pGIS was used by 18 participants to convey their recommendations. Each participant was provided with 530 virtual coins to place into grid cells that they wished to prioritize. They were instructed to place more coins in grid cells that were higher priorities. A maximum of 53 coins could be placed into an individual grid cell by each respondent. Respondents also reported why these locations were important by selecting a minimum of one, and a maximum of two, management uses from the following list: endangered species management (e.g.,), habitat restoration, monitoring, coastal vulnerability planning, watershed management, fisheries management, consultations and permitting, emergency response, and spatial protection and management. Respondents also reported what data types were needed in priority cells. A minimum of one, to a maximum of two choices were selected from the following list: habitat map/characterization, shoreline characterization, ground truthing (e.g. photos and videos collected using ROVs or AUVs), elevation (e.g. bathymetry and topography), backscatter and intensity (e.g. surfaces used to delineate between hard and soft substrate), 2D map product (e.g. static images used to visualize bottom type, presence/absence of taxa), georectified photomosaics (e.g. 3D products created from structure for motion), and water column (e.g. for fish biomass detection). Respondents also reported what method of data collection was desired in each priority cell. Only one response was required and were selected from the following list: satellite, lidar, multibeam echosounder, split beam echosounder, side-scan sonar, photogrammetry, drop-camera, and uncrewed systems. Coin values were summarized and mapped to identify high priority areas, reasons for those priorities, and information needs. This ESRI shapefile contains the 10.4 km2 grid cells used in this prioritization and their associated coin values overall, as well as by management use, data product, and mapping methodology. Other summary values include the number of participants, number of participating groups, number of management uses, and number of data products. Also included is a ranking of each grid cell based on the total number of coins, management uses, and agencies allocating coins in the respective cell. For a complete description of the process and analysis see: Kraus et al., 2022.