5.0 MAPPING EXAMPLE The following example uses the same mapping example from the physical shore-zone
mapping manual (Howes et al. 1994) and extends the mapping process to the biotic mapping
requirements. The intention is to depict the integration between the physical and
biological mapping methods and the specifics of the biotic mapping process. For
convenience, the physical mapping example is reproduced in this report as 5.1 Project Data and Exposure Information Information in the project data and exposure databases ( Data collection specific to the biotic mapping database begins at the shore unit level. The physical mapper will complete the shore unit data base with the exception of the land use and freshwater influence fields (Table 5). In this example, the land use category is none (N) and there is no freshwater influence (N). Table 5 - Shore Unit Database Example
5.3 Across-shore Component Information Information contained in the component data base ( Information on banding is unique to the biotic mapping system. Bands are identified
from aerial video, aerial transparencies or from the ground. The band database entries are
presented in Table 6 and are schematically represented in Table 6 - Band Database Example. The major organisms associated with each band, their relative abundances and any
microhabitat associations of more abundant and conspicuous species are compiled in the
biota database ( Note that within the spray zone, the abundance of Verrucaria is simply referred to as the width of the entire band containing this algae. For all other species, the abundance is referred to as rare (R), few (F), common (C), or abundant (A). Most species are generally distributed, except for Petrolithes cinctripes which occurred only in mussel beds. Table 7 - Biota Database Example
5.6 Explicitly Mapped Information The information mapped so far in this example has been for relatively sedentary
intertidal or subtidal organisms. More mobile, nearshore species such as most fish, birds
and mammals do not lend themselves to this type of mapping treatment. For many of the
mobile species, the preferred approach is to map their distribution as a polygon which can
then be linked to adjacent shore units if desired. In addition, polygons have been used by
many individuals to map the distribution of many sessile species (e.g., clams, geoducks,
kelp). In other cases, the data base for each species or group of species would vary and
no attempt is made in this manual to develop or design databases for all possible
explicitly mapped resources. For most resources, a minimum database would include
information on abundance and timing of presence. The example shown in FIGURE 5 - Herring fishery in the Copper Island area
TABLE 8 - Fisheries coding sheet
HTML Created: July 97 |