Prioritizing Seafloor Mapping for Washington’s Pacific Coast

Remote sensing systems are critical tools used for characterizing the geological and ecological composition of the seafloor. However, creating comprehensive and detailed maps of ocean and coastal environments has been hindered by the high cost of operating ship- and aircraft-based sensors. While a number of groups (e.g., academic research, government resource management, and private sector) are engaged in or would benefit from the collection of additional seafloor mapping data, disparate priorities, dauntingly large data gaps, and insufficient funding have confounded strategic planning efforts. In this study, we addressed these challenges by implementing a quantitative, spatial process to facilitate prioritizing seafloor mapping needs in Washington State. The Washington State Prioritization Tool (WASP), a custom web-based mapping tool, was developed to solicit and analyze mapping priorities from each participating group. The process resulted in the identification of several discrete, high priority mapping hotspots. As a result, several of the areas have been or will be subsequently mapped. Furthermore, information captured during the process about the intended application of the mapping data was paramount for identifying the optimum remote sensing sensors and acquisition parameters to use during subsequent mapping surveys.

[1]  W. Maleika The influence of the grid resolution on the accuracy of the digital terrain model used in seabed modeling , 2015, Marine Geophysical Research.

[2]  R. Webster,et al.  Kriging: a method of interpolation for geographical information systems , 1990, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[3]  T. Battista,et al.  Spatially Prioritizing Seafloor Mapping for Coastal and Marine Planning , 2015 .

[4]  The theory of general kriging, with applications to the determination of a local geoid , 2005 .

[5]  Simon J. Pittman,et al.  Comparative evaluation of airborne LiDAR and ship-based multibeam SoNAR bathymetry and intensity for mapping coral reef ecosystems , 2009 .

[6]  Jeremy Firestone,et al.  Opinion: The time has come for offshore wind power in the United States , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  C. Menza,et al.  Technical and mapping support for Washington State marine spatial planning , 2014 .

[8]  A. Getis The Analysis of Spatial Association by Use of Distance Statistics , 2010 .

[9]  Carrie V. Kappel,et al.  Ecosystem service tradeoff analysis reveals the value of marine spatial planning for multiple ocean uses , 2012, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  F. Douvere The importance of marine spatial planning in advancing ecosystem-based sea use management , 2008 .

[11]  K. Shadan,et al.  Available online: , 2012 .

[12]  Max Nielsen-Pincus,et al.  Mapping a Values Typology in Three Counties of the Interior Northwest, USA: Scale, Geographic Associations Among Values, and the Use of Intensity Weights , 2011 .

[13]  B. Brown Science and management , 1995, Coral Reefs.

[14]  J. Ord,et al.  Local Spatial Autocorrelation Statistics: Distributional Issues and an Application , 2010 .

[15]  L. Crowder,et al.  Resolving Mismatches in U.S. Ocean Governance , 2006, Science.