Description: The Florida Reef Resiliance Program (FRRP) Disturbance Response Monitoring (DRM) was developed for monitoring shallow coral reefs from the Florida Keys to Martin County. The DRM consists of a probabilistic sampling design and a stony coral condition monitoring protocol implemented during the annual period of peak thermal stress. Each year since 2005, survey teams from federal, state, and local government agencies, universities and non-governmental organizations cooperate to complete surveys across the south Florida Reef Tract within a six to eight week period. Surveyors include: The Nature Conservancy, Mote Marine Laboratory, University of Miami, Nova Southeastern University, Miami-Dade County, Broward County, Palm Beach County, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, National Park Service, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Since 2005, 1658 surveys have been completed.
This layer is a compilation of data from 2010-2012 illustrating the number of corals identified at each site for the SEFCRI region
Description: This is a compilation of known Dendrogyra locations (no specified time frame) by FWC. In summer 2013, FWC-NCRI plan to ground-truth these points three times annually.
Copyright Text: Kate Lunz, FWC
Nicole D'Antonio (NCRI)
Description: This file is a compilation of the 2012 and 2013 data collection from all partner agencies, and includes the survey locations, coordinates, habitat strata, fish density, and fish richness for each primary survey unit (PSU).
Reef fishes are an important biologic, ecologic, and economic resource of the marine ecosystem which must be managed for sustainability. However, until recently there was no long-term monitoring program in place to assess the state of the fish resources of the northern FRT (northern Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties). An assessment/monitoring plan for the northern Florida reef tract was designed through a joint cooperative effort by scientists at the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, NOAA-Southeast Fisheries Science Center and Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center. This effort was originally funded for three years (2012, 2013, and 2014). This file is a compilation of the 2012 and 2013 data collection from all partner agencies, and includes the survey locations, coordinates, habitat strata, fish density, and fish richness for each Primary survey unit (PSU). The majority of the field work was accomplished through funding granted to NSUOC. However, a significant amount of data was also collected by multiple partner agencies that were able to dedicate their time and resources to the cause. In 2012 funding for the first year of data collection was awarded by FDEP to NSUOC on July 1st, 2012. Funding for a second year of sampling was awarded by NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP) to NSUOC through the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI) Cooperative Agreement. Field sampling for each year began in May and ran through October. The dataset, in its entirety, provides the opportunity for further mining to examine specific species and assemblage correlations with a host of abiotic and biotic variables. Thus, from both management and ecological-sciences perspectives it is a valuable resource. It is already clear there are significant differences in the current geographic distribution of the regional and local reef fishes. There are interacting strata and latitudinal differences in total abundance, species, sizes, and assemblage structure. The combination of data from all three years will provide a complete regional baseline fishery-independent assessment.
Copyright Text: The dataset was compiled and quality checked by a team of people including Kirk Kilfoyle, Brian Walker, Steve Smith and Jeremiah Blondeau. GIS data were created by Brian Walker.
Description: This file is a compilation of the 2012 and 2013 data collection from all partner agencies, and includes the survey locations, coordinates, habitat strata, fish density, and fish richness for each primary survey unit (PSU).
Reef fishes are an important biologic, ecologic, and economic resource of the marine ecosystem which must be managed for sustainability. However, until recently there was no long-term monitoring program in place to assess the state of the fish resources of the northern FRT (northern Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties). An assessment/monitoring plan for the northern Florida reef tract was designed through a joint cooperative effort by scientists at the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, NOAA-Southeast Fisheries Science Center and Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center. This effort was originally funded for three years (2012, 2013, and 2014). This file is a compilation of the 2012 and 2013 data collection from all partner agencies, and includes the survey locations, coordinates, habitat strata, fish density, and fish richness for each Primary survey unit (PSU). The majority of the field work was accomplished through funding granted to NSUOC. However, a significant amount of data was also collected by multiple partner agencies that were able to dedicate their time and resources to the cause. In 2012 funding for the first year of data collection was awarded by FDEP to NSUOC on July 1st, 2012. Funding for a second year of sampling was awarded by NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP) to NSUOC through the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI) Cooperative Agreement. Field sampling for each year began in May and ran through October. The dataset, in its entirety, provides the opportunity for further mining to examine specific species and assemblage correlations with a host of abiotic and biotic variables. Thus, from both management and ecological-sciences perspectives it is a valuable resource. It is already clear there are significant differences in the current geographic distribution of the regional and local reef fishes. There are interacting strata and latitudinal differences in total abundance, species, sizes, and assemblage structure. The combination of data from all three years will provide a complete regional baseline fishery-independent assessment.
Copyright Text: The dataset was compiled and quality checked by a team of people including Kirk Kilfoyle, Brian Walker, Steve Smith and Jeremiah Blondeau. GIS data were created by Brian Walker.
Description: A total of 193 commercial fishers provided information on their fishing activities off the coast of Southeast Florida, off the coast of Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Martin counties. The fishers also provided socio-demographic, economic, and perceptions data.
Description: A total of 193 commercial fishers provided information on their fishing activities off the coast of Southeast Florida, off the coast of Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Martin counties. The fishers also provided socio-demographic, economic, and perceptions data.
Description: A total of 193 commercial fishers provided information on their fishing activities off the coast of Southeast Florida, off the coast of Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Martin counties. The fishers also provided socio-demographic, economic, and perceptions data.
Description: A total of 193 commercial fishers provided information on their fishing activities off the coast of Southeast Florida, off the coast of Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Martin counties. The fishers also provided socio-demographic, economic, and perceptions data.
Description: A total of 193 commercial fishers provided information on their fishing activities off the coast of Southeast Florida, off the coast of Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Martin counties. The fishers also provided socio-demographic, economic, and perceptions data.
Description: Information on population and housing units was downloaded from the American Factfinder website of the U.S. Census Bureau. This information was joined to tabblock TIGER/Line files (see below) using unique block geoid codes. Shapefiles depicting water features (areawater.shp) for each county were erased from the tabblock shapefiles, and the area in square miles was calculated for each Census block. To calculate population and housing unit density, total population and housing units were divided by the area (sqmi) values.
The TIGER/Line Files are shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) that are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line File is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. Census Blocks are statistical areas bounded on all sides by visible features, such as streets, roads, streams, and railroad tracks, and/or by nonvisible boundaries such as city, town, township, and county limits, and short line-of-sight extensions of streets and roads. Census blocks are relatively small in area; for example, a block in a city bounded by streets. However, census blocks in remote areas are often large and irregular and may even be many square miles in area. A common misunderstanding is that data users think census blocks are used geographically to build all other census geographic areas, rather all other census geographic areas are updated and then used as the primary constraints, along with roads and water features, to delineate the tabulation blocks. As a result, all Census 2000 blocks nest within every other Census 2000 geographic area, so that Census Bureau statistical data can be tabulated at the block level and aggregated up to the appropriate geographic areas. Census blocks cover all territory in the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas (American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands). Blocks are the smallest geographic areas for which the Census Bureau publishes data from the decennial census. A block may consist of one or more faces.
Description: Vessel information (location, type, length, and activity) and passenger information (activity) were collected for 3406 vessels that were observed during periods of low, medium, and high use between 4/29/2008 and 11/19/2009. Three data collection (helicopter) flights occurred during each use level. For each use level one flight occurred in the spring, one in the summer, and one in the fall. The design was selected to determine if a seasonal component in use patterns exists. An additional (10th) flight was added for the Florida spiny lobster “mini-season.” The dataset was used in a study that had as its goal an initial assessment of vessel use patterns on the natural reefs of the southeast Florida region (Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties). In addition, the researchers sought to develop methods that would form the basis for a standardized, repeatable approach to monitoring and characterizing the coral reef usage patterns by recreational and commercial vessels. Ultimately, the patterns described from the data and the methods developed are meant to form a tool for managers to use in conserving and protecting the coral reefs of southeast Florida.
Copyright Text: The data was collected by the University of Florida for the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative (SEFCRI) of the Florida Department of Envionmental Protection.
Description: These data was generated to provide insight into traffic patterns on a macro scale so they could be analyzed across the coastal waters of the Continental United States. For this dataset a transit is counted for every unique vessel intersecting a 1 kilometer square grid cell each day. This data represents the total number of vessel transits from October 2009 - October 2010. There were some grid cells which were unable to be processed, but we do not believe this interferes with the integrity of this dataset. Please note multiple connection errors occurred during the time frame of this study. In most cases data gaps were filled by making subsequent request to the coastguard or other groups receiving the same data feed. However, due to resource constraints uninterrupted coverage was not obtained. Overall data outages were minimal on the order less than a day per month and because random and affect all areas uniformly do not has a significant effect on the integrity of the data. Also as stated on the USCG NAIS website AIS data is not representative of all vessel traffic and USCG NAIS receivers do not fully cover the entire extent of this study area. Please take time to understand both of these limitations.
Description: Descriptive inventory of public access boat ramps throughout Florida, derived from raw data produced during the Florida Boating Access Facilities Inventory and Economic Study, FWC contract Number 04/05-23, product delivered August 30, 2009. This data set is modified from the original format and supplemented by additional data maintained by FWC. These data will eventually evolve into a planned integrated boating access facilities inventory system. This data set is a selection of facilities from the raw data set that the contractor identified to be in operation and accessible to the general public during the time of data compilation. This data set includes both government managed facilities accessible to the general public and commerciality operated facilities accessible to the general public. In both cases a fee might be charged for use of the facility. The attribute fields included in this data set are a subset of those available in the raw data set. These attribute fields were selected and modified to present only attribute information that might be of most interest to the general public desiring to use these facilities. This modified data set is meant to be an interim data set for public dissemination until a more robust database application is constructed to provide interactive access to the original data via web services. Currently these data are considered preliminary and are not verified by FWC as to accuracy and completeness.
Copyright Text: Funded by a grant from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Program awarded to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. The overlying project is titled Florida Boating Access Facilities Inventory and Economic Study. Original data compilation conducted under sub-contract to the Urban Harbors Institute at the University of Massachusetts through contract number FWC 04/05-23 and product delivered August 30, 2009. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and Lee County commissioned the body of work from which these data are derived. The University of Massachusetts at Boston Urban Harbors Institute was lead contractor. Bordner Research Associates conducted field inspections. The project was commissioned in 2005 and titled the Florida Boating and Access Facilities Inventory and Economic Study.
Description: This GIS data set shows the locations of marine facilities around Florida. These data were created by FWRI staff referencing various sources. Attributes include type of facility and location (address). Please note that with the exception of a few areas, these data were compiled 2001 or prior. (Includes marinas, boat ramps, resorts/hotels, banks/bridges)
Color: [0, 255, 197, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 8 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: This GIS data set references major water features for cartographic purposes. Only named features are represented along the outer coastline, so this is not a complete listing of all inlets, passes, rivers, etc.
This GIS data set represents inlets, passes, and major rivers along the coast of Florida. Point location of major features are heads-up digitzed using 2004 DOQQ imagery as reference. The names of features are taken from GNIS, when available or from NOAA Nautical Charts.
Description: Reef injury sites include vessel Groundings, anchor drags, cable tow drags, chain drag, and orphan sites. A primary goal of the Reef Injury Prevention and Response Program is to develop and implement management actions that prevent coral reef injuries associated with commercial and recreational vessels using tools created through the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative and other local action strategies. Where damages to reef resources do occur, the goal is to ensure that appropriate and adequate restoration and/or mitigation is carried out on impacted coral reef resources and that those responsible for damages are held accountable.As the state's lead trustee for coral reef resources, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is charged with response and recovery for coral reef injuries on sovereign submerged lands. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, county governments with reefs in their jurisdiction, and federal agencies assume roles in response to coral reef injuries, depending on the specifics of the event.
Description: This GIS data set represents the Florida approximate state waters line, based on the Submerged Lands Act. As interpreted from the U.S. code, the Submerged Lands Act gives states authority to control the use of resources from state submerged lands, which include lands under estuarine waters out to the Federal-State boundary delineated by the Minerals Management Service.
Copyright Text: FWRI extracted the Florida portion of the submerged lands act line from data downloaded from NOAA. FWRI used NOAA's metadata as a base for this document and included FWRI standard information and information about processing done by FWRI.
Description: The TIGER/Line Files are shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) that are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line File is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The primary legal divisions of most States are termed counties. In Louisiana, these divisions are known as parishes. In Alaska, which has no counties, the equivalent entities are the organized boroughs, city and boroughs, and municipalities, and for the unorganized area, census areas. The latter are delineated cooperatively for statistical purposes by the State of Alaska and the Census Bureau. In four States (Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia), there are one or more incorporated places that are independent of any county organization and thus constitute primary divisions of their States. These incorporated places are known as independent cities and are treated as equivalent entities for purposes of data presentation. The District of Columbia and Guam have no primary divisions, and each area is considered an equivalent entity for purposes of data presentation. The Census Bureau treats the following entities as equivalents of counties for purposes of data presentation: Municipios in Puerto Rico, Districts and Islands in American Samoa, Municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Islands in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas is covered by counties or equivalent entities. The 2010 Census boundaries for counties and equivalent entities are as of January 1, 2010, primarily as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS).
Description: The Ocean Planning Information System (OPIS) is a prototype online regional marine GIS covering the vast ocean area bounded by the Carolinas, Georgia, Florida, the exclusive economic zone, and various maritime boundaries. The Ocean GIS was developed to provide coastal and ocean resource managers in the Southeast access to regional digital geographic mapping information and technologies to facilitate coordinated decision making within and accross the multi- layered U.S. ocean management framework. Special emphasis is placed on the federal ocean and coastal management and governance framework, and efforts are ongoing to develop similar data sets for state and local level policy frameworks. The Southeast OPIS is an ongoing project that has and continues to rely on the vision, dedication, helpfulness, and energy of individuals from partner agencies and numerous other organizations. The Ocean GIS partnership includes: North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division of Coastal Management, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, Florida Coastal Management Program, Georgia Department of Natural Resources - Coastal Resources Division, NOAA Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, U.S. Department of Interior - Minerals Management Service, Florida Marine Research Institute, and NOAA Coastal Services Center. OPIS provides marine resource managers with timely and equitable access to downloadable data, cutting-edge online mapping functionality, and guidance on how to use GIS in a meaningful way with respect to ocean management. THE DATA INCLUDED IN THIS APPLICATION ARE BASED ON INTERPRETATION OF AVAILABLE INFORMATION AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS LEGALLY BINDING.
Description: This dataset is a 200-m x 200-m polygon grid developed by The University of Miami's Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (UM-RSMAS) and the National Marine Fisheries Southeast Fisheries Science Center (NFMS-SEFSC). The grid forms the basis for a two-stage stratified random sampling allocation scheme that was developed to estimate important metrics for living resource populations (e.g., corals and reef fishes) in Southwest Florida (extending from Martin County in the northeast through the Florida Keys to the Dry Tortugas in the southwest).
Copyright Text: Map Creation:
Dr. Christopher Jeffrey and Shay Viehman, NOAA National Ocean Service, National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science.
RVC Grid Data:
Drs. Jerald S. Ault and Steve G. Smith, University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy, Miami FL 33149., Dr. Jerald S. Ault
University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science
4600 Rickenbacker Cswy
Miami, FL 33149
Description: This layer was created by merging the shapefiles of the abovementioned FKNMS Zones. Shapefiles were obtained from the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary.· Source: 62 FR 32161, June 12, 1997, unless otherwise noted.· 922.164 Additional activity regulations by Sanctuary area.· http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=cc6b87a832159c7ead2fb2d2055becc9&rgn=div6&view=text&node=15:3.1.2.2.11.16&idno=15"
Description: To depict the boating restricted areas as established for the purpose of regulating the speed and operation of vessel traffic for the safety of the public. This data is provided to assist in located boating restricted areas.This data set represents the FWC Boating Restricted Areas, Chapter 68D-24.
Description: This layer depicts groups of mooring buoys, or mooring fields, for five counties in Southeast Florida. Attributes include the name of the mooring field, centroid cooridnates, number of buoys per mooring field site, as well as any additional informaiton provided by the municipal managing unit. Coordinates of buoys or mooring fields were sent to NOAA by county or city munipalities for the five counties. Mooring fields were assembled by creating a rectangle that encompassed the coordinate points for all the buoys in a given location. A separate shapefile contains exact coordinate point locations for all mooring buoys.
Copyright Text: Coordinate info received from: Janet Phipps, Department of Environmental Resources, Palm Beach County; Buzz Billue, Sunset Bay and Anchorage, city of Stuart (Martin County); Sara Thanner, Miami-Dade Department of Environmental Resources Management; Rick Jones and Bryan Davisson, Monroe County Government; and David Stout, Broward County Environmental Protection and Growth Management Department. Shapefile assembled by Angela Orthmeyer (angela.orthmeyer@noaa.gov).
Description: Based on the Critical Erosion Report for 2013. Indicates the condition of shoreline, determined by our staff of Coastal Engineers. This report is used to document areas of change and to help the beach management staff with prioritizing projects and resources to the areas of greatest need.
Description: The purpose of this data is to provide a single map layer covering the Anchorage Areas for the United States contained in the Code of Federal Regulation documentation.This layer represents Anchorage Areas as specified by the U.S. Coast Guard in 2008 CFR Title 33 Part 110 and additional anchorage areas provided by 2000 NOAA data.
Copyright Text: Operation Systems Center (OSC), United States Coast Guard (USCG)
Description: The inventory represents a collection of data compiled from various federal, state, tribal and territorial entities to provide a publicly available source of comprehensive information on place-based marine conservation efforts under U.S. federal, state, territorial, local, and tribal jurisdiction.
Copyright Text: NOAA Marine Protected Areas Center in joint effort with the US Department of the Interior
Color: [85, 255, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 10 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: MPAs are defined by the Executive Order 13158 as “any area of the marine environment (including the Great Lakes) that has been reserved by federal, state, territorial, tribal, or local laws or regulations to provide lasting protection for part or all of the natural and cultural resources therein.” NMFS stands for the National Marine Fisheries Service.
The inventory represents a collection of data compiled from various federal, state, tribal and territorial entities to provide a publicly available source of comprehensive information on place-based marine conservation efforts under U.S. federal, state, territorial, local, and tribal jurisdiction.
Copyright Text: NOAA Marine Protected Areas Center in joint effort with the US Department of the Interior
Description: This data layer depicts the external boundaries of lands and waters that are approved for acquisition by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) in North America, U.S. Trust Territories and Possessions. The primary source for this information is the USFWS Realty program.
The intended application of this data layer is as a cadastral framework for use with other data layers in GIS and mapping applications. It is specifically not intended to be used as a land survey or representation of land for conveyance or tax purposes.
Copyright Text: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Realty, Cadastral Data Working Work
Description: These data represent the critical habitat for elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata) and staghorn coral (A. cervicornis) as designated by 73 FR 72210, November 26, 2008, Rules and Regulations.
Color: [0, 112, 255, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 12 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: State Park Management Zones were created to sub-divide park lands into areas that best facilitate the management of the park lands for conservation and recreation.
Copyright Text: Florida DEP Division of Recreation and Parks
Color: [255, 170, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 8 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: This GIS data set represents aquatic preserves (AP) in the State of Florida. The Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) originally created Aquatic Preserves (AP) in the State of Florida from legal descriptions using 1:24000 scale shoreline. Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas (CAMA) now maintains the data set. Aquatic preserves are ecologically significant submerged lands maintained in relatively pristine condition.
Divisions within the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) have felt the need to develop digital coverages for the state-owned or managed properties they oversee and are in the process of reducing the legal descriptions on deeds into a digital form by interpreting and transferring the legal description to a quad sheet or using one or another of the COordinate GeOmetry (COGO) systems. These lands include the Aquatic Preserves and the State Park boundaries. Where possible, to minimize duplication of effort, the Department acquired the boundaries already created for the Aquatic Preserves.
Description: Outstanding Florida Waters, (OFW), are waters designated worthy of special protection because of their natural attributes. This special designation is applied to certain waters, and is intended to protect and maintain existing acceptable quality standards. The OFW layer is a GIS spatial dataset that represents the OFW boundaries throughout the state of Florida. This project involves adding new data to and modifying existing data within the OFW data layer for better accuracy and representation. Boundaries for Outstanding Florida Waters (OFWs) as described in Section 62-302.700, F.A.C. This layer includes all three types of OFWs: OFW Aquatic Preserves, Special OFWs, and Other OFWs.
Description: This GIS data set represents no discharge areas in south Florida. The discharge of untreated "sewage" from boats into waters of the State is prohibited by both State law (Florida Litter Law - 403.413, F.S.) and Federal law (Clean Water Act). The state waters within the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary are of Clean Water Act no discharge designation 312(f)(4)(A) protecting special aquatic habitats or species. The waters around Key West are also include a designation of 312(f)(3) protecting aquatic habitats where pumpout facilities are available. This data set is intended to represent the outer boundary only. The "No Discharge Zone" includes only water areas by definition.
Description: Created using the coordinates found in the NOAA Technical Report, OAR AOML-38. FACE OUTFALLS SURVEY CRUISE—OCTOBER 6-19, 2006. T. Carsey H. Casanova .C Drayer, C Featherstone, C. Fischer K. Goodwin. J. Proni. A. Saied. C. Sinigalliano. J. Stamates. P. Swart. J.-Z. Zhang. Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory. Miami, Florida. February 2010
Description: The inlet contributing areas (ICAs) were delineated using the WATERSHED feature class in the SFWMD’s ArcHydro Extended Database. The watershed boundaries were modified based on the flow direction in the HYDROEDGE feature class, published reports for the Saint Lucie watershed, and technical input from South Florida Watershed Management District (SFWMD) personnel. The conservation areas on the west and some areas near Lake Okeechobee were excluded since that water either flows to the Lake or to the Everglades. Coastal watersheds encompassing the intra-coastal waterway were split into separate ICAs based on publish areas for tidal lenses.
Copyright Text: Kurtis Gregg (NOAA); Kevin Carter, Ken Konyha , and Lesley Bertolotti (SFWMD)
Description: Each point in this GIS data set represents a single deployment event (either a uniquely located artificial reef or deployments of the same reef on different days). Division of Marine Fisheries Management maintains and updates the source database. This data set represents deployments through March, 2011.This data set is for display purposes only. Do not use it for navigation. Each point location is intended to represent a single deployment event, defined as either different location coordinates or the same coordinates but on different days. It is important to note that DMF has not independently confirmed most of the reef locations and this data had been supplied form various sources without verification.
Copyright Text: FWC Division of Marine Fisheries Management
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 8 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: This GIS data set was developed to represent the most recent seagrass mapping available in Florida for current statewide display and analysis. Not all areas have been mapped. This data set includes areas that were not previously mapped in other statewide compilations. This data set is not appropriate for time series comparisons to previous statewide compilations.
This polygon GIS data set represents a compilation of statewide seagrass data from various source agencies and scales. The data were mapped from sources ranging in date from 1987 to 2010. Not all data in this compilation are mapped from photography; some are the results of field measurements. See the "Sources" section for more information. The original source data sets were not all classified in the same manner; some used the Florida Land Use Cover and Forms Classification System (FLUCCS) codes 9113 for discontinuous seagrass and 9116 for continuous seagrass; some defined only presence and absence of seagrass, and some defined varying degrees of seagrass percent cover. In order to merge all of these data sources into one compilation data set, FWRI reclassified the various source data attribute schemes into two categories: "Continuous Seagrass" and "Patchy (Discontinuous) Seagrass". In areas where studies overlap, the most recent study where a given area has been interpreted is represented in this data set. This data set is not comparable to previous statewide data sets for time series studies - not all areas have been updated since the previous statewide compilation and some areas previously not mapped are now included. Please contact GIS Librarian to request the source data if you need to do a time series comparison. This data set has been updated in several areas from the previous compilation, including Indian River Lagoon (2009), Northern Miami-Dade (2009), Biscayne Bay (2005), Dry Tortugas (2006), and Parts of Rookery Bay NERR (2003-2006).
Description: This GIS data set represents critical habitat areas for Johnson's seagrass. The regulations contained in this part identify those habitats designated by the Secretary of Commerce as critical under section 4 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), for endangered and threatened species under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Commerce. [Code of Federal Regulations] [Title 50, Volume 6] [Revised as of October 1, 2004] From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access [CITE: 50CFR226.213] [Page 215-224] TITLE 50--WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES CHAPTER II--NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PART 226_DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT Sec. 226.213 Critical habitat for Johnson's seagrass. Critical habitat is designated to include substrate and water in ten portions of the Indian River Lagoon and Biscayne Bay within the current range of Johnson's seagrass. Definition of Critical Habitat-- Critical habitat is defined in section 3(5)(A) of the ESA as ``(i) the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species...on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require special management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species...upon a determination by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.'' The term ``conservation'' as defined in section 3(3) of the ESA, means ``...to use and the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this Act are no longer necessary.'' In designating critical habitat, NMFS must consider the requirements of the species, including: (1) space for individual and population growth, and for normal behavior; (2) food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological requirements; (3) cover or shelter; (4) sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing of offspring; and, generally, (5) habitats that are protected from disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and ecological distributions of the species (50 CFR 424.12(b)). In addition, NMFS must focus on and list the known physical and biological features (primary constituent elements) within the designated area(s) that are essential to the conservation of the species and that may require special management considerations or protection. These essential features may include, but are not limited to, food resources, water quality or quantity, and vegetation and sediment types and stability (50 CFR 424.12(b)).
Description: This GIS data set represents mangroves in Florida. The data are reselected from land use and land cover data from Florida's water management districts.
Copyright Text: The data are reselected from land use land cover data from the Southwest Florida Water Management District, St. Johns River Water Management District, and South Florida Water Management District.
Description: Tidal flats are non-vegetated areas of sand or mud protected from wave action and composed primarily of mud transported by tidal channels. An important characteristic of the tidal flat environment is its alternating tidal cycle of submergence and exposure to the atmosphere. This GIS data set was created to show a statewide representation of unvegetated tidal flats, compiled from the best available sources. The sources included individual seagrass mapping studies and National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) data for Florida. The NWI was ERASEd using more recent data sources that showed some areas were indeed vegetated. See Source Information for more details on how each source was used.
This GIS data set represents tidal flats in Florida for cartographic and analytical purposes. Source years vary. The methodology is different from previous statewide tidal flats data sets; this data set is not intended for temporal statewide comparisons.
Description: This GIS data set represents the saltwater marsh areas in Florida. The data are a compilation of available land use and land cover information mapped by Florida's water management districts. The most recent data available as of April 2014 are used; the photography dates are between 1999 and 2011.
This data set was created as a statewide compilation of saltwater marsh areas to use for mapping and analysis based on the most current data available. This information is not appropriate for time series analysis with previous compilations since the mapping methodology is different.
Copyright Text: Florida's water management districts provided the land use and land cover data.
Description: This GIS data set represents oyster coverage for available study areas in the state of Florida. Not all areas have been mapped, but this dataset represents the oyster data available to FWRI as of November 2011. Source dates vary and many studies are much older than the compilation date. See the Source Information section for more details. This GIS data set was created to represent oysters for general mapping purposes only. Different studies used different methodologies and not all areas have been mapped.
Copyright Text: These data are compiled data from various source organizations listed in the Source Citations.
Description: This GIS data set represents known locations of annelid worm reefs. It is not a comprehensive mapping effort. The Nature Conservancy created a worm reef shapefile, containing the locations of annelid worm reefs (Phragmaopoma lapidosa) on Florida'a east coast as identified from available literature and location information obtained from worm reef experts in Florida. FGDL - Digital Orthophoto Quarter Quad 3 Meter aerial images were used in some cases to identify sites from previous sources. FWRI staff added worm reefs from the Broward County benthic habitat mapping (2004). Sources Used by TNC include: Kirtley, D. and W. Tanner. 1968. Sabellariid Worms: Builders of a major reef type. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 73-38. McCarthy, D. 2004. Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce. Personal communication. Stauble, D. and D. McNeil. 1985. Coastal geology and the occurrence of beachrock: central Florida Atlantic coast. Field Guide for the Annual Meeting of the Geological Society of America, part 1. 27 p.
Copyright Text: The Nature Conservancy provided the original worm reefs shapefile. FWRI added reefs in Broward County.
Description: These data identify, in general, the areas where final critical habitat for the Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris ) occur, as described in the Federal Register, Vol. 41, No. 187, September 24, 1976. FWRI staff downloaded this GIS data set from the USFWS Critical Habitat Portal.
Copyright Text: USFWS provided the data and minimal metadata information. FWRI has altered the metadata to include processing donw by FWRI.
Description: Southeast regional bathymetric contours consist of a vector coverage of bathymetric contours with increasing resolution in coastal areas. Contours were derived from a composite of several bathymetric datasets of varying regional coverage and resolution. Isobath intervals range from 2 meter in coastal areas to 200 meters in deep offshore areas.
This coverage was developed to compliment other regional spatial data utilized by ocean planners in addressing management issues. It is intended only to provide general information on regional scale ocean depth and bottom morphology.
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 8 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: Locations of mooring buoys in the SEFCRI region provided by various sources.To help protect our coral reefs, Florida law prohibits dropping an anchor onto living corals. As further protection, a mooring buoy system was installed so that boaters can moor on reefs without using an anchor and avoid violating the law or damaging the reef. Miami-Dade County mooring buoys are maintained by the Restoration and Enhancement Section in the Regulatory and Economic Resources Department. Funding was provided by the County and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s Florida Boater Improvement Program. Broward County mooring buoys are maintained by the Natural Resources Planning and Management Division. Funding was provided by the County and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program. The Palm Beach County mooring buoy program is a partnership between Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Funding was provided by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program.The St. Lucie Inlet Park Preserve Mooring Buoys are maintained by the Florida Park Service. Funding was provided by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program.
Copyright Text: Costaregni, A & Walker, B. Nova Southeastern University
Description: The TIGER/Line Files are shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) that are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line File is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The primary legal divisions of most States are termed counties. In Louisiana, these divisions are known as parishes. In Alaska, which has no counties, the equivalent entities are the organized boroughs, city and boroughs, and municipalities, and for the unorganized area, census areas. The latter are delineated cooperatively for statistical purposes by the State of Alaska and the Census Bureau. In four States (Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia), there are one or more incorporated places that are independent of any county organization and thus constitute primary divisions of their States. These incorporated places are known as independent cities and are treated as equivalent entities for purposes of data presentation. The District of Columbia and Guam have no primary divisions, and each area is considered an equivalent entity for purposes of data presentation. The Census Bureau treats the following entities as equivalents of counties for purposes of data presentation: Municipios in Puerto Rico, Districts and Islands in American Samoa, Municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Islands in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas is covered by counties or equivalent entities. The 2010 Census boundaries for counties and equivalent entities are as of January 1, 2010, primarily as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS).
Description: This data layer was digitized from the raster charts rather than having coordinates manually entered in from a Corps of Engineers Permit. You can tell where they came from by looking at the "SORIND" field (SORIND stands for "Source Indication" in S-57 protocol and refers to the origin of the data.) In most cases, you will see a chart listed as the source (meaning it was digitized from there). In other cases, you may see a document like "L-1444-2013". The letter means that the coordinates were manually entered from a permit or other original source rather than being digitized from a raster chart.
Description: The regulations that apply to the Naval Exclusion Zone are as follows: (1) Anchoring, trawling, dredging, or attaching any object to the submerged sea bottom shall be prohibited in the above described area.(2) The regulations of this section shall be enforced by the Facility Director, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Detachment Dania, Florida, and such agencies as he/she may designate. [51 FR 1370, Jan. 13, 1986, as amended at 70 FR 67371, Nov. 7, 2005]
Copyright Text: Title 33 - Navigation and Navigable Waters. CHAPTER II - CORPS OF ENGINEERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.
Description: This GIS data set represents the Particularly Sensitive Sea Area around the Florida Keys as defined by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Resolution MEPC.98(47) adopted on 8 March 2002. In order to avoid the risk of pollution and damage to this unique, fragile, and pristine coral reef ecosystem, mariners should exercise extreme care when navigating in the area which is designated as a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area: The definition given by IMO did not create a closed polygon. In order to create a closed polygon, a straight line was drawn from the Everglades National Park to the starting point of the boundary.
Description: Dumping Areas from Approach and Harbor Charts. NOAA's ENC Direct to GIS web portal provides comprehensive access to display, query, and download all available NOAA ENC data in a variety of GIS/CAD formats for non-navigational purposes using Internet mapping service technology. A sea area where dredged material or other potentially more harmful material, e.g. explosives, chemical waste, is deliberately deposited. (Derived from IHO Chart Specifications, M-4).
Description: This Spiny Lobster sanctuary was digitized based on the legal description. The Biscayne National Park contains this area of Biscayne Bay known as Card Sound Lobster Sanctuary. The sanctuary boundary is defined by Florida Administrative Code Chap 68B-11 Biscayne Bay/Card Sound Spiny Lobster Sanctuary.
This Spiny Lobster sanctuary map was created to match the legal description. The purpose is to graphically represent the Biscayne Bay Card Sound Spiny Lobster Sanctuary for cartographic purposes.
Description: This shapefile is a combination of the most recent SE FL benthic habitat maps. The nearshore has been updated according to Walker and Klug 2014 and combined with all previous mapping efforts.
The SE FL nearshore benthic habitats were mapped using the same combined technique approach as described in Walker, Riegl, and Dodge (2008). Polygons were created by outlining and defining the features at a 1:1,000 scale and minimum mapping unit of 0.1 ha within recent aerial photography and high resolution bathymetric survey data. Southeast Florida benthic habitat maps were produced by delineating seafloor features evident in multiple datasets including the GMR Aerial Surveys, Inc. dba Photo Scienceimagery collected for this purpose on March 8, 2013, 2008 Broward lidar, and 2009 NOAA bathymetry. This dataset built upon previous regional mapping efforts by Dr. Brian Walker at Nova Southeastern University. The habitats were classified according to established NOAA guidelines in coordination with the NOS Coral Mapping Program and use a similar classification scheme when possible.
Copyright Text: This work was prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) by Nova Southeastern University. Funding for this report was provided in part by a Coastal Services Center grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Ocean Service Award No. NA11N0S4820003, and by the Department, through its Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas. The total cost of the project was $248,611.00, of which 100 percent was provided by the NOAA. The views, statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the State of Florida, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, or any of its subagencies. Thank you to Florida Department of Environmental Protection Southeast Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center, and the South Florida Coral Reef Initiative for supporting this effort. Thanks to NOAA Office of Coast Survey, Broward County Natural Resources Planning and Management Division, and Coastal Planning and Engineering for supplying the LIDAR data. We especially would like to thank Amanda Costaregni and Ian Rodericks of the Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center (NSUOC) Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Ecology lab and Dr. David Gilliam and his NSUOC Coral Reef Restoration, Assessment & Monitoring Lab, for the many hours spent underwater to aid in the completion of data collection for this project, including Nicole D’Antonio, Ariel Halperin, Chuck Walton, Kathryn Binder, Cody Bliss, Lystina Kabay, Mauricio Lopez Padierna, and Daniel Fahy. A final thank you to Captain Lance Robinson and Brian Buskirk for providing reliable vessels for our many field days.
Description: This is a line GIS data set of detailed bathymetry located offshore northern Broward County, Florida produced using bathymetric data from a Laser Airborne Depth Sounding (LADS) survey. The contours are drawn at 15ft depth intervals. The contour features were spatially manipulated to match the contours of adjacent Broward County. The features were clipped at the 1:24000 Broward County Boundary and edge matched. ArcGIS 9.1 was used to edge match contours using the midpoint of the link. Where the gap was greater than 5 meters, smoothing was applied manually to vertices within a 30 meter radius of the link point.
This data was created for engineers and geotechnical personnel to produce a method for the characterization of the hard bottom and reef resources of the Broward County coastline, and to provide a unique basemap for cartographic needs.
Copyright Text: This data set is in the public domain, and the recipient may not assert any proprietary rights thereto nor represent it to anyone as other than a FWC-FWRI produced data set or the appropriate originator; it is provided "as-is" without warranty of any kind, including, but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. The user assumes all responsibility for the accuracy and suitability of this data set for a specific application. In no event will the staff of the Fish and Wildlife Research Institute be liable for any damages, including lost profits, lost savings, or other incidental or consequential damages arising from the use of or the inability to use this data set.
Description: This is a line GIS data set of detailed bathymetry located offshore Martin County, Florida produced using bathymetric data from a LIDAR survey conducted by Blom Aerofilms in 2008 in concert with Nova Southeastern University's Martin County benthic habitat mapping funded by FWC State Wildlife grant. The depth contours are drawn at 15ft intervals
This data was created for geotechnical personnel to produce a method for the characterization of the hard bottom and reef resources of the Martin County coastline, and to provide a unique basemap for cartographic needs. It is not intended for navigational use.
Copyright Text: Brian K. Walker. This data set is in the public domain, and the recipient may not assert any proprietary rights thereto nor represent it to anyone as other than a FWC-FWRI produced data set or the appropriate originator; it is provided "as-is" without warranty of any kind, including, but not limited to, the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose. The user assumes all responsibility for the accuracy and suitability of this data set for a specific application. In no event will the staff of the Fish and Wildlife Research Institute be liable for any damages, including lost profits, lost savings, or other incidental or consequential damages arising from the use of or the inability to use this data set.
Description: This is a line coverage of detailed bathymetry located offshore Palm Beach County, Florida produced using bathymetric data from a Laser Airborne Depth Sounding (LADS) survey. Depth contours are drawn at 15ft intervals.
This data was created for engineers and geotechnical personnel to produce a method for the characterization of the hardbottom and reef resources of the Dade County coastline. To provide a unique basemap for cartographic needs.
Copyright Text: Coastal Planning and Engineering, Inc.The data represents the results of data collection/processing for a specific Coastal Planning and Engineering, Inc. activity and indicates the general existing conditions at the time of survey. As such, it is only valid for its intended use, content, time, and accuracy specifications. The user is responsible for the results of an application of the data other than its intended purpose.
Description: This is a line coverage of detailed bathymetry located offshore northern Dade County, Florida produced using bathymetric data from a Laser Airborne Depth Sounding (LADS) survey. Depth contours are drawn at 15ft. intervals.
This data was created for engineers and geotechnical personnel to produce a method for the characterization of the hardbottom and reef resources of the Dade County coastline. To provide a unique basemap for cartographic needs.
Copyright Text: Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc.The data represents the results of data collection/processing for a specific Coastal Planning and Engineering, Inc. activity and indicates the general existing conditions at the time of survey. As such, it is only valid for its intended use, content, time, and accuracy specifications. The user is responsible for the results of an application of the data other than its intended purpose.
Description: The dive operator study used a field-based approach to survey dive operators, whose population was determined using a variety of sources. A survey instrument was developed and modeled after the commercial fishing study survey instrument, and initial contact with each operation via telephone to describe the study and a field session to complete the surveys was conducted. (Shivlani, 2007)
Description: A total of 59 charter fishing operators provided information on their fishing activities off the coast of Southeast Florida, off the coast of Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Martin counties. The fishers also provided socio-demographic, economic, and perceptions data.
The SEFCRI charter fishing operations study was a component of the FDOU Combined Project 10. The charter fishing operations study followed the methodology developed for the commercial fishing study, in that it used a field-based approach to survey charter fishing operations, whose population was determined using a variety of sources.
Name: Areas Used by Researchers and Managers (Shivlani, 2007)
Display Field: ET_Index
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: The researcher and manager studyused a field-based approach to survey researchers and managers. The study relied mainly on a directed (as opposed to a random) sample that was obtained from a variety of sources. The study effort consisted of the development of a survey instrument that was modeled after the commercial fishing study survey instrument but also included several questions on research and management issues. Initial contact with each individual was via email or telephone to describe the study, and a face-to-face interview was performed to the conduct surveys. It should be noted that when the researcher or manager was either not located in the SEFCRI region or was otherwise unavailable for a direct interview a phone interview was conducted. The researcher and manager study led to the completion of 55 surveys. (Shivlani, 2007)
Name: Areas of Use Conflicts for Researchers and Managers (Shivlani, 2007)
Display Field: ET_Index
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: The researcher and manager studyused a field-based approach to survey researchers and managers. The study relied mainly on a directed (as opposed to a random) sample that was obtained from a variety of sources. The study effort consisted of the development of a survey instrument that was modeled after the commercial fishing study survey instrument but also included several questions on research and management issues. Initial contact with each individual was via email or telephone to describe the study, and a face-to-face interview was performed to the conduct surveys. It should be noted that when the researcher or manager was either not located in the SEFCRI region or was otherwise unavailable for a direct interview a phone interview was conducted. The researcher and manager study led to the completion of 55 surveys.The researcher and manager studyused a field-based approach to survey researchers and managers. The study relied mainly on a directed (as opposed to a random) sample that was obtained from a variety of sources. The study effort consisted of the development of a survey instrument that was modeled after the commercial fishing study survey instrument but also included several questions on research and management issues. Initial contact with each individual was via email or telephone to describe the study, and a face-to-face interview was performed to the conduct surveys. It should be noted that when the researcher or manager was either not located in the SEFCRI region or was otherwise unavailable for a direct interview a phone interview was conducted. The researcher and manager study led to the completion of 55 surveys. (Shivlani, 2007)
Name: Areas of Use Conflicts for Divers (Shivlani, 2007)
Display Field: ET_Index
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: The dive operator study used a field-based approach to survey dive operators, whose population was determined using a variety of sources. A survey instrument was developed and modeled after the commercial fishing study survey instrument3, and initial contact with each operation via telephone to describe the study and a field session to complete the surveys was conducted. Generally, dive operations did not identify many use conflicts.The only areas that were identified tended to nearshore dive sites that operators described as having too many users. Otherwise, most dive operations believed that their activities were not affected by other users, with the exception of recreational boaters. (Shivlani, 2007)
Description: Project lines have been established in a still on going effort to identify specific areas of the counties where active or expired projects exist. Considering this effort is still on going and in draft form the information contained within the layers are subject to change and should not be used for any surveying, engineering, or legal determinations. The information used to determine the project line locations have been translated and taken from the Final Orders issued for each project.
Copyright Text: Department of Environmental Protection, Beaches, Mining, and ERP Support Program
Description: Layer Package 4. The fourth layer package to update the Marine Planner on 4/8/2015 including all layers requested by the CWG in the Our Florida Reefs Community Planning process.
Copyright Text: Costaregni, A. & Walker, B. (Nova)
Description: Locations of mooring buoys in the SEFCRI region provided by various sources.To help protect our coral reefs, Florida law prohibits dropping an anchor onto living corals. As further protection, a mooring buoy system was installed so that boaters can moor on reefs without using an anchor and avoid violating the law or damaging the reef. Miami-Dade County mooring buoys are maintained by the Restoration and Enhancement Section in the Regulatory and Economic Resources Department. Funding was provided by the County and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s Florida Boater Improvement Program. Broward County mooring buoys are maintained by the Natural Resources Planning and Management Division. Funding was provided by the County and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program. The Palm Beach County mooring buoy program is a partnership between Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Funding was provided by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program.The St. Lucie Inlet Park Preserve Mooring Buoys are maintained by the Florida Park Service. Funding was provided by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program.
Copyright Text: Costaregni, A & Walker, B. Nova Southeastern University
Description: The data was created to serve as base information for use in GIS systems for a variety of planning and analytical purposes. This dataset contains city limits for the State of Florida. The data was compiled by the GeoPlan Center using tax code boundaries as defined in 2010 county parcel data from the Florida Department of Revenue (FDOR). This dataset is an update to the city limits shapefile par_citylm_2010.shp.
Copyright Text: Florida Department of Revenue and the 67 - County Property Appraisers.
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 9 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: This information was gathered by FDEP for Maritime Industry and Coastal Construction Impacts (MICCI) projects.
On October 13, 1995, the Department of Environmental Protection implemented Section 161.055, of the Florida Statutes, initiating concurrent processing of applications for coastal construction permits, environmental resource permits and sovereign submerged lands authorizations. These permits and authorizations, which were previously issued separately, and by different state agencies, have now been consolidated into a "joint coastal permit" or JCP. The consolidation of these reviews and the assignment of responsibility into a single program has eliminated the potential for conflict between permitting agencies and helped ensure that reviews are conducted in a timely manner. A copy of each permit application is forwarded to the United States Army Corps of Engineers for separate processing of the federal dredge and fill permit, if necessary.
Activities that require a JCP include beach restoration or nourishment; construction of erosion control structures such as groins and breakwaters; public fishing piers; maintenance of inlets and inlet-related structures; and dredging of navigation channels that include disposal of dredged material onto the beach or in the nearshore area.
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 8 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: This data set contains vector lines representing the shoreline and coastal habitats of South Florida (2012) classified according to the Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) classification system. The data symbolized in this layer indicate shore-line and coastal structures including exposed, solid, man-made structures and sheltered, solid, man-made structures. 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. Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) is more properly known as "Sensitivity of Coastal Habitats and Wildlife to Spilled Oil" Atlases. The term "ESI" is often used in reference to the whole dataset, but the term "ESI" is really a reference to the classification system of shoreline types known as Environmental Sensitivity Index, that classifies a shoreline on a scale from 1 to 10 based upon overall sensitivity to spilled oil.
Description: This dataset contains generalized land use derived from parcel specific land use for Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) District 4 and District 6. The original 99 land use classes from the parcel data have been collapsed into 15 generalized classes. This data has been updated for 2012
Description: This layer aims to show the areas and severity of beach erosion as determined by our engineering staff. It is based on the Critical Erosion Report for 2013. Indicates the condition of shoreline, determined by our staff of Coastal Engineers. This report is used to document areas of change and to help the beach management staff with prioritizing projects and resources to the areas of greatest need.
Copyright Text: FDEP - Bureau of Beaches and Coastal Systems
Description: This layer was created from the 2012 Florida Administrative Code 18-21 Sovereignty Submerged Lands Management. Points were plotted from the code and lines were drawn between them to illustrate the gap. The code reads as follows: (l) Applications for telecommunication lines received after October 29, 2003 that originate from or extend to locations outside of the state’s territorial limits through the territorial sea including the area between mean high and mean low water lines and any associated conduits shall be subject to the following: 1. Installations shall be approved only where the applicant provides satisfactory evidence of a need by providing documentation in the form of: a. A copy of their Federal Communications Commission cable landing license; and either b. A contract to install telecommunication lines and associated conduits to an upland distribution network and stating the projected date of installation; or c. A letter of commitment from a company in the business of installing or using telecommunication lines for a line that will be installed and connected to an upland distribution network, functional for transmitting data, and on-line within a specified time frame once a conduit is made available.
2. Installations at individual landing sites are limited to no more than six telecommunication lines and conduits except where the applicant can affirmatively demonstrate that the landing site will support a larger number of such lines and that the routing to the State’s territorial limits within the territorial sea will cause no more than minimal individual and cumulative impacts. However, installations using subconduits within a conduit shall be allowed up to six subconduits and one additional conduit. In no case shall more than two conduits with subconduits be authorized until such time as the capacity of one conduit is fully utilized for telecommunication line installation. 3. Installations shall be prohibited on or under submerged lands within Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve, Biscayne Bay National Park, and Monroe County. 4. Conduits for telecommunication lines shall be directionally drilled under nearshore benthic resources, including the first reef and any other more inshore reefs off Southeast Florida, to the maximum extent practicable and shall punch out in a location that avoids or minimizes impacts to benthic resources such as seagrasses and live bottom communities including corals and sponges. 5. While locating in these areas is not required for approval, special consideration areas are designated for telecommunication lines and associated conduits located within the reef-gaps generally described as follows, based on World Geodetic System 84.
a. Lake Worth Gap (northern Palm Beach County), beginning at the easternmost end at N. Lat. 26 37.659/W. Long. 80 01.341 (south side) to N. Lat. 26 38.481/W. Long. 80 01.258 (north side), in a 1,672 yard-wide gap. b. South Lake Worth Inlet Gap (central Palm Beach County), beginning at the easternmost end at N. Lat. 26 32.492/W. Long. 80 01.610 (south side) to N. Lat. 26 32.444/W. Long. 80 01.626 (north side), in a 100 yard-wide gap. c. Delray Gap (southern Palm Beach County), beginning at the easternmost end at N. Lat. 26 27.393/W. Long. 80 02.765 (south side) to N. Lat. 26 27.641/W. Long. 80 02.726 (north side), in a 508 yard-wide gap. d. Sea Turtle Gap (southern Palm Beach County), beginning at the easternmost end at N. Lat. 26 22.672/W. Long. 80 03.224 (south side) to N. Lat. 26 22.748/W. Long. 80 03.224 (north side), in a 154 yard-wide gap. e. South Broward Gap (southern Broward County), beginning at the easternmost end at N. Lat. 25 58.438/W. Long. 80 05.278 (south side) and N. Lat. 25 58.821/W. Long. 80 05.271 (north side) and extending westerly on its southerly limits through the following points: N. Lat. 25 58.977/W. Long. 80 05.733, N. Lat. 25 59.132/W. Long. 80 05.997, and ending at N. Lat. 25 59.138/ W. Long. 80 06.366, and westerly on its northerly limits through the following points: N. Lat. 25 59.039/W. Long. 80 05.725, N. Lat. 25 59.205/W. Long. 80 06.060, and ending at N. Lat. 25 59.192/W. Long. 80 06.371.
Copyright Text: Walker, B.K. Nova Southeastern University
Description: These data were derived from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Offshore Installations Electronic Navigational Charts (ENC). A polyline submarine cable GIS layer was downloaded and then clipped to illustrate only the submarine cables in Florida.
Description: The purpose of this shapefile is to provide the location (as geocoded to the Street Level) of KNOWN Septic Tanks that are in the FDOH Bureau of Environmental Health's Environmental Health Database. This file only contains those records that A) Could be assigned a Latitude and Longitude, B) had their construction approved and at least one inspection of the system (usually at construction). This excludes Holding Tanks and Abandonments. Last Updated 11/15/2013
Copyright Text: Florida Department of Health - Division of Disease Control and Health Protection - Bureau of Environmental Health Contact: Mike Sims - GIS Manager Mike.Sims@FLHealth.Gov
Description: Structures are built constructions where water flow is disrupted or controlled in canals by water managers. A structure is a cohesive whole built or erected from distinct parts; a structure may be composed of other structures. A structure, or hydraulic structure in the Water Management System, is a submerged or partially submerged artifact in any body of water (including groundwater) that disrupts the natural flow of water, conveys water, controls the direction or rate of flow, maintains a desired water surface elevation, or measures water. AHED contains all structures operated by SFWMD and also some that belong to city, county, and 298 districts. The non district features are added in areas that are operationally important for the district.
The Structure feature class was populated using the Enterprise Structure SDE Layer (IMFDC_STRUCTURE_SITE) and additional locations provided by the District within the Stormwater Treatment Areas. Once Structures were added to AHED, the locations were verified using the 1:12000 DOQQs or higher resolution county imagery. The data is comprised of Structures that are primary and secondary and are classified as such in the HYDRO_ORDER field. Structures are related to the hydro network using hydrojunctions to build the relationships.
Copyright Text: South Florida Water Management District
Description: Watershed feature class in AHED was populated with Basins from HESM in 2004. During AHED population project Watershed boundaries were edited in consultation with subject matter experts. The Watershed boundaries were edited to be coincident with Controlled or UnControlled hydrojunctions associated with structures of the same types. New watersheds were also defined in areas that were not delineated as such before, for example STAs. Topology rules are enforced among features of Basin, Subbasin, Watershed, SubWatershed and Rainarea feature classes. The key attributes in the Watershed feature class are JUNCTIONID (HydroID of the related DrainPoint HydroJunction) and SUBBASINID (HydroID of the containing subbasin).
Copyright Text: South Florida Water Management District
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 8 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: A Site is a location that is typically associated with one or more functionally related Water Management System components (e.g., structures) or monitoring stations or control stations in proximity to one another. A Site can be defined for different purposes. Site boundaries may or may not be explicitly defined and may or may not overlap.
Copyright Text: South Florida Water Management District
Description: A Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System or MS4 is defined in Rule 62-624.2(8), F.A.C., as follows:
Municipal separate storm sewer or MS4 means a conveyance or system of conveyances like roads with stormwater systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, constructed channels, or storm drains: Owned or operated by a State, city, town, county, special district, association, or other public body (created by or pursuant to State Law) having jurisdiction over management and discharge of stormwater, or an Indian tribe or an authorized Indian tribal organization, that discharges to waters of the state; Designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater; Which is not a combined sewer; and which is not part of a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW). POTW means any device or system used in the treatment of municipal sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature which is owned by a "State" or "municipality." This definition includes sewers, pipes, or other conveyances only if they convey wastewater to a POTW providing treatment.The city limits coverage from FDEP SDE and the USGS 2M boundary cover were used to generate the polygons for this cover. The attributes were assigned using data from the NPDES Stormwater MS4 Permit information. The information is correct as of June 2007.
Copyright Text: Florida Department of Environmental Protection
Description: ECHO data focuses on compliance- and enforcement-related information for regulated facilities, including:
•Permit data
•Inspection/compliance evaluation dates and findings
•Violations of environmental regulations
•Enforcement actions
•Penalties assessed
Quarters of Non-Compliance (3 yrs) [fac_qtrs_in_nc] is the count of the number of quarters, out of the last twelve quarters, in which the permit or site is considered either with violations, in non-compliance (NC) status, or in Significant Non-compliance (SNC) or High Priority Violation (HPV) status. A quarter is any of the following 3-month calendar periods: January-March, April-June, July-September, or October-December.
Copyright Text: Data obtained from United States EPA
Description: This layer is not a comprehensive inventory of all Acropora found in southeast Florida. It indicates where Acropora cervicornis and Acropora palmata were found at sites that have been surveyed. If an area does not have any symbols indicating Acropora presence or absense, this area has not been surveyed and can not be considered absent of Acropora. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) have embarked upon a collaborative effort to produce an online tool to allow for the open dissemination of Acropora-related datasets. An ArcGIS geodatabase has been built with the purpose of effective and accurate depiction of benthic data related to Acropora palmataand A. cervicornis. The geodatabase has been populated with significant multi-agency data from federal, state, university and non-government organizations. These agencies include NOAA, National Park Service, FWC, University of Miami, Univeristy of North Carolina - Wilmington, National Coral Reef Institute and The Nature Conservancy. All datasets include Acropora presence/absence and latitudinal /longitudinal coordinates at the minimum. This project was funded by award NA1ONMF4720029 from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Description: This GIS data set represents Southeast Coral Reef Evaluation & Monitoring Project (SECREMP) categories based on current coral cover and coral cover trends.
This product was funded by the Florida's State Wildlife Grants Program under the project "Identification of suitable coral restoration sites and resilient coral reef communities through assessment of existing coral monitoring data." 2014/2016. Principle investigators were Luke McEachron, Kate Lunz, and Katie Wirt. This project used input from the scientific community to predict and assess actionable locations for coral restoration. This layer was one component of a larger modeling effort, but it can be used independently for other purposes.
Copyright Text: FWC and Florida's State Wildlife Grants Program. Principle investigators were Luke McEachron, Kate Lunz, and Katie Wirt.
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 9 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: This dataset includes indices for intensity of bleaching, disease prevalence, and reef resilience for the SEFCRI region as performed in VanWoesik and Burman 2012. Data were collected by a variety of institutions under the coordination of the Nature Conservancy’s Florida Reef Resilience Program. Stony coral data were collected from multiple habitat types across the south Florida shelf from St. Lucie Inlet to Biscayne Bay for years 2005 through 2014. The data were collected during synoptic broad-scale surveys of coral reef and hard-bottom habitats that were stratified into sub-regions or along-shelf positions (e.g., Biscayne, SEFCRI and various habitat types (e.g., patch reefs, low relief hard-bottom, high-relief spur and groove, etc.). A 200m x 200m polygon grid was used to overlay onto existing bathymetry and benthic habitat maps of the study area, and a two-stage stratified random design was used to select sites for sampling from various strata combinations of cross-shelf habitat type, along-shelf position (i.e. region), and management zone (http://frrp.org/). Index classes were based on 2 standard deviations for Coral Density (1.91), Standardized Bleaching index (1.6), and Standardized Disease Index (0.847). Sites where values were greater than 2 SDs received a 1, all others a 0. The Reef Resilience Index was the result of Coral density class, minus the SBI class, minus the SDI class. Sites with a value of 2 are valued the highest as they have relatively high coral cover and low bleaching and disease prevalence.
Attribute Fields:MetricDescriptionBatchBatch codeSiteSite codeLatitudeLatitude (decimal degrees)LongitudeLongitude (decimal degrees)SubregionGeographic subregion categoryZoneReef zone categoryHabitatHabitat categoryDepthAverage depth of survey (meters)RegionGeographic RegionN_TaxaTotal number of Taxa (genus or speciesNC_SumNumber of coral colonies summed from two transect surveysBI_MeanAverage number of bleached (partially or totally bleached) coloniesDisTot_SumDisease prevalence (Number of total diseased colonies)ColDensTotal number of coral colonies per squrare meterN_TransNumber of transectsSBIIBleaching Index (0=no bleaching - 3=all corals bleached)SDIIDisease prevalence Index (Total number of disease colonies per square meter)Area_m2Area (square meters) surveyedDensClassCoral Colony Density Index (# per square meter)SBII_ClassSite Bleaching Intensity IndexSDII_ClassSite Disease IndexRRIReef Resilience Index
Copyright Text: Map creation: Christopher Jeffrey, Ph.D (CSS-Dynamac at NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science). Data were provided by The Nature Conservancy http://frrp.org/data/).
Description: The dataset includes Taxonomic richness (# of genera and species combined), intensity of bleaching, and disease prevalence, and an index of reef resilience (see VanWoesik and Burman 2012) of benthic stony corals collected from multiple habitat types across the south Florida shelf from St. Lucie Inlet to Biscayne Bay for years 2005 through 2014. The data were collected during synoptic broad-scale surveys of coral reef and hard-bottom habitats that were stratified into sub-regions or along-shelf positions (e.g., Biscayne, SEFCRI and various habitat types (e.g., patch reefs, low relief hard-bottom, high-relief spur and groove, etc.). A 200m x 200m polygon grid was used to overlay onto existing bathymetry and benthic habitat maps of the study area, and a two-stage stratified random design was used to select sites for sampling from various strata combinations of cross-shelf habitat type, along-shelf position (i.e. region), and management zone (http://frrp.org/).Attribute Fields:MetricDescriptionBatchBatch codeSiteSite codeLatitudeLatitude (decimal degrees)LongitudeLongitude (decimal degrees)SubregionGeographic subregion categoryZoneReef zone categoryHabitatHabitat categoryDepthAverage depth of survey (meters)RegionGeographic RegionN_TaxaTotal number of Taxa (genus or speciesNC_SumNumber of coral colonies summed from two transect surveysBI_MeanAverage number of bleached (partially or totally bleached) coloniesDisTot_SumDisease prevalence (Number of total diseased colonies)ColDensTotal number of coral colonies per squrare meterN_TransNumber of transectsSBIIBleaching Index (0=no bleaching - 3=all corals bleached)SDIIDisease prevalence Index (Total number of disease colonies per square meter)Area_m2Area (square meters) surveyedDensClassCoral Colony Density Index (# per square meter)SBII_ClassSite Bleaching Intensity IndexSDII_ClassSite Disease IndexRRIReef Resilience Index
Copyright Text: Map creation: Christopher Jeffrey, Ph.D (CSS-Dynamac at NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science). Data were provided by The Nature Conservancy http://frrp.org/data/).
Description: This dataset includes indices for intensity of bleaching, disease prevalence, and reef resilience for the SEFCRI region as performed in VanWoesik and Burman 2012. Data were collected by a variety of institutions under the coordination of the Nature Conservancy’s Florida Reef Resilience Program. Stony coral data were collected from multiple habitat types across the south Florida shelf from St. Lucie Inlet to Biscayne Bay for years 2005 through 2014. The data were collected during synoptic broad-scale surveys of coral reef and hard-bottom habitats that were stratified into sub-regions or along-shelf positions (e.g., Biscayne, SEFCRI and various habitat types (e.g., patch reefs, low relief hard-bottom, high-relief spur and groove, etc.). A 200m x 200m polygon grid was used to overlay onto existing bathymetry and benthic habitat maps of the study area, and a two-stage stratified random design was used to select sites for sampling from various strata combinations of cross-shelf habitat type, along-shelf position (i.e. region), and management zone (http://frrp.org/). Index classes were based on 2 standard deviations for Coral Density (1.91), Standardized Bleaching index (1.6), and Standardized Disease Index (0.847). Sites where values were greater than 2 SDs received a 1, all others a 0. The Reef Resilience Index was the result of Coral density class, minus the SBI class, minus the SDI class. Sites with a value of 2 are valued the highest as they have relatively high coral cover and low bleaching and disease prevalence.
Attribute Fields:MetricDescriptionBatchBatch codeSiteSite codeLatitudeLatitude (decimal degrees)LongitudeLongitude (decimal degrees)SubregionGeographic subregion categoryZoneReef zone categoryHabitatHabitat categoryDepthAverage depth of survey (meters)RegionGeographic RegionN_TaxaTotal number of Taxa (genus or speciesNC_SumNumber of coral colonies summed from two transect surveysBI_MeanAverage number of bleached (partially or totally bleached) coloniesDisTot_SumDisease prevalence (Number of total diseased colonies)ColDensTotal number of coral colonies per squrare meterN_TransNumber of transectsSBIIBleaching Index (0=no bleaching - 3=all corals bleached)SDIIDisease prevalence Index (Total number of disease colonies per square meter)Area_m2Area (square meters) surveyedDensClassCoral Colony Density Index (# per square meter)SBII_ClassSite Bleaching Intensity IndexSDII_ClassSite Disease IndexRRIReef Resilience Index
Copyright Text: Map creation: Christopher Jeffrey, Ph.D (CSS-Dynamac at NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science). Data were provided by The Nature Conservancy http://frrp.org/data/).
Description: The largest corals in a population are the oldest and have exponentially more reproductive capacity than smaller ones making them the one of the most important demographic in a community. A pilot study was conducted by Brian Walker in 2014 to identify the location and condition of the largest corals in SE FL. The locations were identified remotely in LIDAR bathymetry and aerial photography. Out of the 195 targets identified, 126 sites were visited at which over 110 were large corals. Of those, 50 were found alive and 40 were estimated at greater than 2 meters wide. This layer depicts the planning units where one or more of the live large corals was documented.
Copyright Text: Walker, B.K. Nova Southeastern University
Description: Benthic data were compiled from a variety of sources for the SEFCRI region for this layer. The main data source was from a recent FDEP study that conducted a power analysis to understand the level of surveying needed to detect change of certain benthic types including stony coral, soft coral, and sponges (Fauth 2012). This dataset was acquired and updated with the latest information for monitoring stations and other large surveys that took place since. FRRP data were downloaded from TNC’s website from 2005 – 2014. Percent Cover was calculated by determining the area of stony corals as a percentage of the surveyed area. This likely overestimated percent cover because colony areas outside the survey transect were measured and included. SECREMP and Broward monitoring data were updated with 2013 data. Several quantitative surveys for mapping efforts were included. Martin county mapping (2011), Town of Palm Beach nearshore mapping (2014), and SE FL Nearshore Benthic habitat mapping data (2013) were all added. The anchorage sites for the FDEP Port of Miami study were added. Coral density was calculated where possible with the data in hand. Because all studies did not use consistent survey methods there are a number of considerations. In studies where certain information was not collected, those columns received a value of “-9”. This is the integer equivalent to Not Applicable.
Description: This data represents varying levels of anthropogenic stress relevant to corals.
Anthropogenic stressors were identified and compiled by FWRI staff. These include outfalls (FDEP), popular dive sites (created by FWRI, derived from http://www.divespots.com/scuba-diving-spots/florida/florida-keys/), dredge disposal sites (FWRI - MRGIS), ship lanes (FWRI - MRGIS), vessel corridors (FWRI - MRGIS), marinas (FWRI - MRGIS), anchorages (FWRI - MRGIS), and reef injuries (FWRI - MRGIS).
A 1 kilometer grid was created using XTools Pro and the resulting grid was clipped to the study area boundary. One kilometer buffers were created for all stress layers, and a "Stress_Ind" field was added. The "Stress_Ind" field was calculated as "1" for all stressors. For the reef injuries layer, groundings were isolated and classified as a "1," whereas the remaining injuries were classified as "0.5" to represent the less severe nature of the remaining injuries (i.e. anchorings). All stress layers were merged and the spatial join tool (using a sum merge rule) was used to append the total number of intersections of stressors (found in the "Stress_Ind" field) with the grid.
The resulting polygonal grid was converted to a raster and a 1km cell output was ensured.
Copyright Text: FWC-FWRI must be credited. This is not a survey data set and should not be utilized as such. These data are not to be used for navigation.
Description: This data was gathered from The Ocean Conservancy International Coastal Clean-up efforts in 2014. It shows the locations of the clean-up efforts in southeast Florida and the weight of trash in pounds collected at each location. Most trash was collected on the beaches however a small amount was also collected from diving and boating efforts. All of these efforts were combined to get a total weight for the clean-up location.
Description: This data was gathered from the 2013 and 2014 'Dive Against Debris' Reef Clean-ups at various reef sites around southeast Florida. It indicates the number of pieces of debris collected at each location. In response to the onslaught of marine debris Project AWARE launched Dive Against Debris. Created by divers for divers, this global, underwater survey of rubbish is designed to increase debris removal efforts, prevent harm to marine life and connect your underwater actions to policy changes and prevention.
Description: This layer shows the density of anchored vessels in 2008 and 2009.This project conducted aerial (helicopter) surveys to map vessel locations and charcteristics to determine use intensity, anchoring pressure, and predominant activities over the Southeast Florida region, and to associate use level with specific areas of the coral reef tract and other submerged habitat types.
Vessel information (location, type, length, and activity) and passenger information (activity) were collected for 3579 vessels that were observed off of Miami-Dade and Broward counties during periods of low, medium, and high use between 4/29/2008 and 11/19/2009 (CRUPS project) and between 7/4/2012 and 7/30/2014 (Mooring Buoy Project, or MBP). Three data collection (helicopter) flights occurred during each use level, and for each project. For each use level (and project) one flight occurred in the spring, one in the summer, and one in the fall. The design was selected to determine if a seasonal component in use patterns exists. An additional (10th) flight was added for the Florida spiny lobster “mini-season” during both projects. The dataset was used in two studies. The first study had as its goal an initial assessment of vessel use patterns on the natural reefs of the southeast Florida region (Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties). In addition, the researchers sought to develop methods that would form the basis for a standardized, repeatable approach to monitoring and characterizing the coral reef usage patterns by recreational and commercial vessels. The second study sought to determine if anchoring patterns and coral reef damage had changed as a result of installation of mooring buoys in Miami-Dade County. Ultimately, the patterns described from the data and the methods developed are meant to form a tool for managers to use in conserving and protecting the coral reefs of southeast Florida.
Copyright Text: Data collected by the University of Florida. Density layer created by Brian K. Walker and Amanda Costaregni at NSU Oceanographic Center
Description: This layer shows the density of moored vessels in 2008 and 2009.This project conducted aerial (helicopter) surveys to map vessel locations and charcteristics to determine use intensity, anchoring pressure, and predominant activities over the Southeast Florida region, and to associate use level with specific areas of the coral reef tract and other submerged habitat types.
Vessel information (location, type, length, and activity) and passenger information (activity) were collected for 3579 vessels that were observed off of Miami-Dade and Broward counties during periods of low, medium, and high use between 4/29/2008 and 11/19/2009 (CRUPS project) and between 7/4/2012 and 7/30/2014 (Mooring Buoy Project, or MBP). Three data collection (helicopter) flights occurred during each use level, and for each project. For each use level (and project) one flight occurred in the spring, one in the summer, and one in the fall. The design was selected to determine if a seasonal component in use patterns exists. An additional (10th) flight was added for the Florida spiny lobster “mini-season” during both projects. The dataset was used in two studies. The first study had as its goal an initial assessment of vessel use patterns on the natural reefs of the southeast Florida region (Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties). In addition, the researchers sought to develop methods that would form the basis for a standardized, repeatable approach to monitoring and characterizing the coral reef usage patterns by recreational and commercial vessels. The second study sought to determine if anchoring patterns and coral reef damage had changed as a result of installation of mooring buoys in Miami-Dade County. Ultimately, the patterns described from the data and the methods developed are meant to form a tool for managers to use in conserving and protecting the coral reefs of southeast Florida.
Copyright Text: Data collected by the University of Florida. Density layer created by Brian K. Walker and Amanda Costaregni at NSU Oceanographic Center
Description: This layer shows the density of anchored vessels in 2012 through 2014.This project conducted aerial (helicopter) surveys to map vessel locations and charcteristics to determine use intensity, anchoring pressure, and predominant activities over the Southeast Florida region, and to associate use level with specific areas of the coral reef tract and other submerged habitat types.
Vessel information (location, type, length, and activity) and passenger information (activity) were collected for 3579 vessels that were observed off of Miami-Dade and Broward counties during periods of low, medium, and high use between 4/29/2008 and 11/19/2009 (CRUPS project) and between 7/4/2012 and 7/30/2014 (Mooring Buoy Project, or MBP). Three data collection (helicopter) flights occurred during each use level, and for each project. For each use level (and project) one flight occurred in the spring, one in the summer, and one in the fall. The design was selected to determine if a seasonal component in use patterns exists. An additional (10th) flight was added for the Florida spiny lobster “mini-season” during both projects. The dataset was used in two studies. The first study had as its goal an initial assessment of vessel use patterns on the natural reefs of the southeast Florida region (Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties). In addition, the researchers sought to develop methods that would form the basis for a standardized, repeatable approach to monitoring and characterizing the coral reef usage patterns by recreational and commercial vessels. The second study sought to determine if anchoring patterns and coral reef damage had changed as a result of installation of mooring buoys in Miami-Dade County. Ultimately, the patterns described from the data and the methods developed are meant to form a tool for managers to use in conserving and protecting the coral reefs of southeast Florida.
Copyright Text: Data collected by the University of Florida. Density layer created by Brian K. Walker and Amanda Costaregni at NSU Oceanographic Center
Description: This layer shows the density of moored vessels in 2012 through 2014.This project conducted aerial (helicopter) surveys to map vessel locations and charcteristics to determine use intensity, anchoring pressure, and predominant activities over the Southeast Florida region, and to associate use level with specific areas of the coral reef tract and other submerged habitat types.
Vessel information (location, type, length, and activity) and passenger information (activity) were collected for 3579 vessels that were observed off of Miami-Dade and Broward counties during periods of low, medium, and high use between 4/29/2008 and 11/19/2009 (CRUPS project) and between 7/4/2012 and 7/30/2014 (Mooring Buoy Project, or MBP). Three data collection (helicopter) flights occurred during each use level, and for each project. For each use level (and project) one flight occurred in the spring, one in the summer, and one in the fall. The design was selected to determine if a seasonal component in use patterns exists. An additional (10th) flight was added for the Florida spiny lobster “mini-season” during both projects. The dataset was used in two studies. The first study had as its goal an initial assessment of vessel use patterns on the natural reefs of the southeast Florida region (Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties). In addition, the researchers sought to develop methods that would form the basis for a standardized, repeatable approach to monitoring and characterizing the coral reef usage patterns by recreational and commercial vessels. The second study sought to determine if anchoring patterns and coral reef damage had changed as a result of installation of mooring buoys in Miami-Dade County. Ultimately, the patterns described from the data and the methods developed are meant to form a tool for managers to use in conserving and protecting the coral reefs of southeast Florida.
Copyright Text: Data collected by the University of Florida. Density layer created by Brian K. Walker and Amanda Costaregni at NSU Oceanographic Center
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Name: Extractive Diving (SCUBA and free) Activities
Display Field: OFR_Total
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Name: Recreational Fishing and Diving Activity Overlap
Display Field: OFR_Total
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. This overlap layer was created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequented and the estimated intensity of this overlap. This layer only contains planning units where both fishing and diving were reported. The number of visits for each activity were used to determine whether it was high fishing, high diving or nearly equal.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: This file is a compilation of the 2012 and 2013 data collection from all partner agencies, and includes the survey locations, coordinates, habitat strata, fish density, and fish richness for each primary survey unit (PSU).
Reef fishes are an important biologic, ecologic, and economic resource of the marine ecosystem which must be managed for sustainability. However, until recently there was no long-term monitoring program in place to assess the state of the fish resources of the northern FRT (northern Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties). An assessment/monitoring plan for the northern Florida reef tract was designed through a joint cooperative effort by scientists at the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, NOAA-Southeast Fisheries Science Center and Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center. This effort was originally funded for three years (2012, 2013, and 2014). This file is a compilation of the 2012 and 2013 data collection from all partner agencies, and includes the survey locations, coordinates, habitat strata, fish density, and fish richness for each Primary survey unit (PSU). The majority of the field work was accomplished through funding granted to NSUOC. However, a significant amount of data was also collected by multiple partner agencies that were able to dedicate their time and resources to the cause. In 2012 funding for the first year of data collection was awarded by FDEP to NSUOC on July 1st, 2012. Funding for a second year of sampling was awarded by NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP) to NSUOC through the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI) Cooperative Agreement. Field sampling for each year began in May and ran through October. The dataset, in its entirety, provides the opportunity for further mining to examine specific species and assemblage correlations with a host of abiotic and biotic variables. Thus, from both management and ecological-sciences perspectives it is a valuable resource. It is already clear there are significant differences in the current geographic distribution of the regional and local reef fishes. There are interacting strata and latitudinal differences in total abundance, species, sizes, and assemblage structure. The combination of data from all three years will provide a complete regional baseline fishery-independent assessment.
Sites south of Government Cut were supplied by NOAA NMFS as part of the 2012 FL Keys RVC monitoring efforts.
Copyright Text: The dataset was compiled and quality checked by a team of people including Kirk Kilfoyle, Brian Walker, Steve Smith and Jeremiah Blondeau. NOAA NMFS provided data for sites south of Government Cut. GIS data were created by Brian Walker.
Description: This file is a compilation of the 2012 and 2013 data collection from all partner agencies, and includes the survey locations, coordinates, habitat strata, fish density, and fish richness for each primary survey unit (PSU).
Reef fishes are an important biologic, ecologic, and economic resource of the marine ecosystem which must be managed for sustainability. However, until recently there was no long-term monitoring program in place to assess the state of the fish resources of the northern FRT (northern Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties). An assessment/monitoring plan for the northern Florida reef tract was designed through a joint cooperative effort by scientists at the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, NOAA-Southeast Fisheries Science Center and Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center. This effort was originally funded for three years (2012, 2013, and 2014). This file is a compilation of the 2012 and 2013 data collection from all partner agencies, and includes the survey locations, coordinates, habitat strata, fish density, and fish richness for each Primary survey unit (PSU). The majority of the field work was accomplished through funding granted to NSUOC. However, a significant amount of data was also collected by multiple partner agencies that were able to dedicate their time and resources to the cause. In 2012 funding for the first year of data collection was awarded by FDEP to NSUOC on July 1st, 2012. Funding for a second year of sampling was awarded by NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP) to NSUOC through the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI) Cooperative Agreement. Field sampling for each year began in May and ran through October. The dataset, in its entirety, provides the opportunity for further mining to examine specific species and assemblage correlations with a host of abiotic and biotic variables. Thus, from both management and ecological-sciences perspectives it is a valuable resource. It is already clear there are significant differences in the current geographic distribution of the regional and local reef fishes. There are interacting strata and latitudinal differences in total abundance, species, sizes, and assemblage structure. The combination of data from all three years will provide a complete regional baseline fishery-independent assessment.
Sites south of Government Cut were supplied by NOAA NMFS as part of the 2012 FL Keys RVC monitoring efforts.
Copyright Text: The dataset was compiled and quality checked by a team of people including Kirk Kilfoyle, Brian Walker, Steve Smith and Jeremiah Blondeau. NOAA NMFS provided data for sites south of Government Cut. GIS data were created by Brian Walker.
Description: This file is a compilation of the 2012 and 2013 data collection from all partner agencies, and includes the survey locations, coordinates, habitat strata, fish density, and fish richness for each primary survey unit (PSU).
This data layer only contains those species that are recreationally and commercially fished (excluding ornamentals).
Reef fishes are an important biologic, ecologic, and economic resource of the marine ecosystem which must be managed for sustainability. However, until recently there was no long-term monitoring program in place to assess the state of the fish resources of the northern FRT (northern Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties). An assessment/monitoring plan for the northern Florida reef tract was designed through a joint cooperative effort by scientists at the University of Miami Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, NOAA-Southeast Fisheries Science Center and Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center. This effort was originally funded for three years (2012, 2013, and 2014). This file is a compilation of the 2012 and 2013 data collection from all partner agencies, and includes the survey locations, coordinates, habitat strata, fish density, and fish richness for each Primary survey unit (PSU). The majority of the field work was accomplished through funding granted to NSUOC. However, a significant amount of data was also collected by multiple partner agencies that were able to dedicate their time and resources to the cause. In 2012 funding for the first year of data collection was awarded by FDEP to NSUOC on July 1st, 2012. Funding for a second year of sampling was awarded by NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP) to NSUOC through the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI) Cooperative Agreement. Field sampling for each year began in May and ran through October. The dataset, in its entirety, provides the opportunity for further mining to examine specific species and assemblage correlations with a host of abiotic and biotic variables. Thus, from both management and ecological-sciences perspectives it is a valuable resource. It is already clear there are significant differences in the current geographic distribution of the regional and local reef fishes. There are interacting strata and latitudinal differences in total abundance, species, sizes, and assemblage structure. The combination of data from all three years will provide a complete regional baseline fishery-independent assessment.
Sites south of Government Cut were supplied by NOAA NMFS as part of the 2012 FL Keys RVC monitoring efforts.
Copyright Text: The dataset was compiled and quality checked by a team of people including Kirk Kilfoyle, Brian Walker, Steve Smith and Jeremiah Blondeau. NOAA NMFS provided data for sites south of Government Cut. GIS data were created by Brian Walker.
Description: The location of known aggregations are presented in this file. Coordinates are approximate, but further investigation is needed to increase precision and confirm reports. The supplied information represents the current scope of our research. Additional information associated with this file identifies the source, along with date report was received.
Copyright Text: FWC; Aggregations have been identified by Wet Pleasures Dive Outfitters, FIU researchers, Professor Aurther Mariano from University of Miami, Captain Bouncer Smith.
Description: These data show the observed distribution of lion fish in south Florida from 2010-2013 only. They were compiled by Pam Fuller from USGS and are continually updated and corrected. Please visit (http://nas2.er.usgs.gov/viewer/omap.aspx?SpeciesID=963) to view the real-time map. Lionfish are an invasive species in the United States. They inhabit natural (e.g., reef) and artifical structure (e.g., wrecks) at depths from just a few inches of water to over 300 m. In the invaded range, lionfishes have been found in a variety of habitats, including reefs, wrecks, bridge pilings, seagrass and natural hardbottom. In the U.S., lionfishes have rapidly increased in abundance.
The data points that are displayed do not constitute the total dataset. Not all specimens/reports are included in the database; after a species is well-established in an area data are no longer entered. The data shown on the map accurately depict the extent of the areal coverage of lionfish, but do not include all points for all times. Data is constantly added and corrected, so the dataset changes on a daily basis.
The USGS is the national repository for non-native aquatic species, and so the database is compiled of several datasets from partnering agencies and cooperators as well as the general public. It is pieced together from many different sources. Not all sites are sampled in all years, they are opportunistic reports. This data set should not be assumed to be complete. This data is not comprehensive of all introductions in all localities. Hence, these data should not be the sole source for analysis. The goal is to show distribution; not to document abundance. Thus, the dataset is not amenable to the same types of analyses that data from a monitoring program would be (e.g., there are no negative values). To view the original data from USGS please visit (http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/factsheet.aspx?speciesid=963) and click on the real-time map (http://nas2.er.usgs.gov/viewer/omap.aspx?SpeciesID=963).
Description: This data set contains sensitive biological resource data for diving birds, gulls, terns, passerine birds, pelagic birds, raptors, shorebirds, wading birds, and waterfowl in South Florida (2013). Vector points in this data set represent bird nesting and wintering sites. Species specific abundance, seasonality, status, life history, and source ID information have been joined to the attribute table. Source details are stored in a separate related SOURCES data table designed to be used in conjunction with this spatial data layer. This data set comprises a portion of the ESI data for Florida. 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 BIRDS data layer, part of the larger Florida ESI database, for additional bird information. Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) is more properly known as "Sensitivity of Coastal Habitats and Wildlife to Spilled Oil" Atlases. The term "ESI" is often used in reference to the whole dataset, but the term "ESI" is really a reference to the classification system of shoreline types known as Environmental Sensitivity Index, that classifies a shoreline on a scale from 1 to 10 based upon overall sensitivity to spilled oil. FWRI contracted out updates to Florida's ESI data for the Panhandle and South Florida in the years 2010 through early 2013. These datasets were delivered as coverages in region-polygon format that allow for overlapping polygons in the same manner as FWRI's older ESI GIS data (in Gulf-Wide Information System (GWIS) format/specification). Hundreds of new species were added and the regional products were completed and delivered as promised. However, FWRI wanted and needed a statewide product for use within the Marine Resources Geographic Information System (MRGIS) and the Florida Marine Spill Analysis System (FMSAS). This data set is a compilation of the most recent ESI mapping for each area of Florida.
Copyright Text: Prepared by Research Planning, Inc., Columbia, South Carolina for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service, Office of Response and Restoration, Emergency Response Division, Seattle, Washington. This project was supported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Ocean Service (NOS), Office of Response and Restoration (OR&R), Emergency Response Division (ERD), Seattle, Washington, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), United States Coast Guard (USCG), Office of Incident Management and Preparedness Washington, D.C. and the Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI), Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, St. Petersburg, Florida.
Description: The State of Florida, through the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, coordinates the Statewide Nesting Beach Survey program (SNBS). The SNBS was initiated in 1979 under a cooperative agreement between FWC (then DNR) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Its purpose is to document the total distribution, seasonality, and abundance of nesting by sea turtles in Florida. Three species of sea turtles, the loggerhead (Caretta caretta), the green turtle (Chelonia mydas), and the leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), nest regularly on Florida's beaches. Two other species, Kemp’s ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) and the hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) also nest but in very small numbers. All the species are listed as either Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Survey data are derived from observations of tracks and other nesting sign left on the beach by sea turtles. Species identifications and determinations of nesting vs. non-nesting emergences are based on the evaluation of visible features of the track and the nest. Data are gathered on more than 200 beaches through a network of permit holders consisting of private conservation groups, volunteers, consultants, academics, local governments, federal agencies, and the Florida Park Service. Annual nest counts for the state represent a minimum estimate because not all nesting activity is recorded on surveyed beaches and not all nesting beaches in Florida are surveyed. Nest density classifications of “low”, “medium” and “high” were developed for loggerheads, green turtles and leatherbacks according to quartile ranks. For the loggerhead turtle, ranking was done within genetic subunits; ranks for green turtles and leatherbacks were on a statewide basis. Hawksbill turtles and Kemp’s ridleys were denoted only as present or absent on individual beaches. Surveys in the SNBS program may vary with respect to start/stop dates, frequency, duration and beach length between years for a particular beach, as well as between beaches. This variability in the surveys, combined with the dynamic nature of sea turtle nesting activity, make the quartile ranking system for the beaches, rather than average nesting densities over a small number of years, a more appropriate measure of the level of nesting activity that takes place on a particular beach. Survey results are used by managers to evaluate and minimize impacts to turtles and their nests due to human activities such as coastal construction, beach renourishment, and recreation, as well as to identify important areas for enhanced protection or land acquisition. Direct contact by managers with the appropriate state data provider is highly recommended to obtain more detailed information about the surveys on a particular beach.
Copyright Text: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Statewide Nesting Beach Survey program coordinator
Description: The State of Florida, through the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, coordinates the Statewide Nesting Beach Survey program (SNBS). The SNBS was initiated in 1979 under a cooperative agreement between FWC (then DNR) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Its purpose is to document the total distribution, seasonality, and abundance of nesting by sea turtles in Florida. Three species of sea turtles, the loggerhead (Caretta caretta), the green turtle (Chelonia mydas), and the leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), nest regularly on Florida's beaches. Two other species, Kemp’s ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) and the hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) also nest but in very small numbers. All the species are listed as either Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Survey data are derived from observations of tracks and other nesting sign left on the beach by sea turtles. Species identifications and determinations of nesting vs. non-nesting emergences are based on the evaluation of visible features of the track and the nest. Data are gathered on more than 200 beaches through a network of permit holders consisting of private conservation groups, volunteers, consultants, academics, local governments, federal agencies, and the Florida Park Service. Annual nest counts for the state represent a minimum estimate because not all nesting activity is recorded on surveyed beaches and not all nesting beaches in Florida are surveyed. Nest density classifications of “low”, “medium” and “high” were developed for loggerheads, green turtles and leatherbacks according to quartile ranks. For the loggerhead turtle, ranking was done within genetic subunits; ranks for green turtles and leatherbacks were on a statewide basis. Hawksbill turtles and Kemp’s ridleys were denoted only as present or absent on individual beaches. Surveys in the SNBS program may vary with respect to start/stop dates, frequency, duration and beach length between years for a particular beach, as well as between beaches. This variability in the surveys, combined with the dynamic nature of sea turtle nesting activity, make the quartile ranking system for the beaches, rather than average nesting densities over a small number of years, a more appropriate measure of the level of nesting activity that takes place on a particular beach. Survey results are used by managers to evaluate and minimize impacts to turtles and their nests due to human activities such as coastal construction, beach renourishment, and recreation, as well as to identify important areas for enhanced protection or land acquisition. Direct contact by managers with the appropriate state data provider is highly recommended to obtain more detailed information about the surveys on a particular beach.
Copyright Text: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Statewide Nesting Beach Survey program coordinator
Description: The State of Florida, through the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, coordinates the Statewide Nesting Beach Survey program (SNBS). The SNBS was initiated in 1979 under a cooperative agreement between FWC (then DNR) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Its purpose is to document the total distribution, seasonality, and abundance of nesting by sea turtles in Florida. Three species of sea turtles, the loggerhead (Caretta caretta), the green turtle (Chelonia mydas), and the leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), nest regularly on Florida's beaches. Two other species, Kemp’s ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) and the hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) also nest but in very small numbers. All the species are listed as either Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Survey data are derived from observations of tracks and other nesting sign left on the beach by sea turtles. Species identifications and determinations of nesting vs. non-nesting emergences are based on the evaluation of visible features of the track and the nest. Data are gathered on more than 200 beaches through a network of permit holders consisting of private conservation groups, volunteers, consultants, academics, local governments, federal agencies, and the Florida Park Service. Annual nest counts for the state represent a minimum estimate because not all nesting activity is recorded on surveyed beaches and not all nesting beaches in Florida are surveyed. Nest density classifications of “low”, “medium” and “high” were developed for loggerheads, green turtles and leatherbacks according to quartile ranks. For the loggerhead turtle, ranking was done within genetic subunits; ranks for green turtles and leatherbacks were on a statewide basis. Hawksbill turtles and Kemp’s ridleys were denoted only as present or absent on individual beaches. Surveys in the SNBS program may vary with respect to start/stop dates, frequency, duration and beach length between years for a particular beach, as well as between beaches. This variability in the surveys, combined with the dynamic nature of sea turtle nesting activity, make the quartile ranking system for the beaches, rather than average nesting densities over a small number of years, a more appropriate measure of the level of nesting activity that takes place on a particular beach. Survey results are used by managers to evaluate and minimize impacts to turtles and their nests due to human activities such as coastal construction, beach renourishment, and recreation, as well as to identify important areas for enhanced protection or land acquisition. Direct contact by managers with the appropriate state data provider is highly recommended to obtain more detailed information about the surveys on a particular beach.
Copyright Text: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Statewide Nesting Beach Survey program coordinator
Description: The State of Florida, through the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission's Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, coordinates the Statewide Nesting Beach Survey program (SNBS). The SNBS was initiated in 1979 under a cooperative agreement between FWC (then DNR) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Its purpose is to document the total distribution, seasonality, and abundance of nesting by sea turtles in Florida. Three species of sea turtles, the loggerhead (Caretta caretta), the green turtle (Chelonia mydas), and the leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), nest regularly on Florida's beaches. Two other species, Kemp’s ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) and the hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) also nest but in very small numbers. All the species are listed as either Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act. Survey data are derived from observations of tracks and other nesting sign left on the beach by sea turtles. Species identifications and determinations of nesting vs. non-nesting emergences are based on the evaluation of visible features of the track and the nest. Data are gathered on more than 200 beaches through a network of permit holders consisting of private conservation groups, volunteers, consultants, academics, local governments, federal agencies, and the Florida Park Service. Annual nest counts for the state represent a minimum estimate because not all nesting activity is recorded on surveyed beaches and not all nesting beaches in Florida are surveyed. Nest density classifications of “low”, “medium” and “high” were developed for loggerheads, green turtles and leatherbacks according to quartile ranks. For the loggerhead turtle, ranking was done within genetic subunits; ranks for green turtles and leatherbacks were on a statewide basis. Hawksbill turtles and Kemp’s ridleys were denoted only as present or absent on individual beaches. Surveys in the SNBS program may vary with respect to start/stop dates, frequency, duration and beach length between years for a particular beach, as well as between beaches. This variability in the surveys, combined with the dynamic nature of sea turtle nesting activity, make the quartile ranking system for the beaches, rather than average nesting densities over a small number of years, a more appropriate measure of the level of nesting activity that takes place on a particular beach. Survey results are used by managers to evaluate and minimize impacts to turtles and their nests due to human activities such as coastal construction, beach renourishment, and recreation, as well as to identify important areas for enhanced protection or land acquisition. Direct contact by managers with the appropriate state data provider is highly recommended to obtain more detailed information about the surveys on a particular beach.
Copyright Text: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Statewide Nesting Beach Survey program coordinator
Description: This shapefile is all artificial habitat mapped in the region and is a combination of the most recent SE FL benthic habitat maps. The nearshore has been updated according to Walker and Klug 2014 and combined with all previous mapping efforts.
The SE FL nearshore benthic habitats were mapped using the same combined technique approach as described in Walker, Riegl, and Dodge (2008). Polygons were created by outlining and defining the features at a 1:1,000 scale and minimum mapping unit of 0.1 ha within recent aerial photography and high resolution bathymetric survey data. Southeast Florida benthic habitat maps were produced by delineating seafloor features evident in multiple datasets including the GMR Aerial Surveys, Inc. dba Photo Scienceimagery collected for this purpose on March 8, 2013, 2008 Broward lidar, and 2009 NOAA bathymetry. This dataset built upon previous regional mapping efforts by Dr. Brian Walker at Nova Southeastern University. The habitats were classified according to established NOAA guidelines in coordination with the NOS Coral Mapping Program and use a similar classification scheme when possible.
Copyright Text: This work was prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) by Nova Southeastern University. Funding for this report was provided in part by a Coastal Services Center grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Ocean Service Award No. NA11N0S4820003, and by the Department, through its Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas. The total cost of the project was $248,611.00, of which 100 percent was provided by the NOAA. The views, statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the State of Florida, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, or any of its subagencies. Thank you to Florida Department of Environmental Protection Southeast Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center, and the South Florida Coral Reef Initiative for supporting this effort. Thanks to NOAA Office of Coast Survey, Broward County Natural Resources Planning and Management Division, and Coastal Planning and Engineering for supplying the LIDAR data. We especially would like to thank Amanda Costaregni and Ian Rodericks of the Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center (NSUOC) Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Ecology lab and Dr. David Gilliam and his NSUOC Coral Reef Restoration, Assessment & Monitoring Lab, for the many hours spent underwater to aid in the completion of data collection for this project, including Nicole D’Antonio, Ariel Halperin, Chuck Walton, Kathryn Binder, Cody Bliss, Lystina Kabay, Mauricio Lopez Padierna, and Daniel Fahy. A final thank you to Captain Lance Robinson and Brian Buskirk for providing reliable vessels for our many field days.
Description: This shapefile is all coral reef and hard bottom habitat mapped in the region and is a combination of the most recent SE FL benthic habitat maps. The nearshore has been updated according to Walker and Klug 2014 and combined with all previous mapping efforts.
The SE FL nearshore benthic habitats were mapped using the same combined technique approach as described in Walker, Riegl, and Dodge (2008). Polygons were created by outlining and defining the features at a 1:1,000 scale and minimum mapping unit of 0.1 ha within recent aerial photography and high resolution bathymetric survey data. Southeast Florida benthic habitat maps were produced by delineating seafloor features evident in multiple datasets including the GMR Aerial Surveys, Inc. dba Photo Scienceimagery collected for this purpose on March 8, 2013, 2008 Broward lidar, and 2009 NOAA bathymetry. This dataset built upon previous regional mapping efforts by Dr. Brian Walker at Nova Southeastern University. The habitats were classified according to established NOAA guidelines in coordination with the NOS Coral Mapping Program and use a similar classification scheme when possible.
Copyright Text: This work was prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) by Nova Southeastern University. Funding for this report was provided in part by a Coastal Services Center grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Ocean Service Award No. NA11N0S4820003, and by the Department, through its Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas. The total cost of the project was $248,611.00, of which 100 percent was provided by the NOAA. The views, statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the State of Florida, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, or any of its subagencies. Thank you to Florida Department of Environmental Protection Southeast Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center, and the South Florida Coral Reef Initiative for supporting this effort. Thanks to NOAA Office of Coast Survey, Broward County Natural Resources Planning and Management Division, and Coastal Planning and Engineering for supplying the LIDAR data. We especially would like to thank Amanda Costaregni and Ian Rodericks of the Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center (NSUOC) Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Ecology lab and Dr. David Gilliam and his NSUOC Coral Reef Restoration, Assessment & Monitoring Lab, for the many hours spent underwater to aid in the completion of data collection for this project, including Nicole D’Antonio, Ariel Halperin, Chuck Walton, Kathryn Binder, Cody Bliss, Lystina Kabay, Mauricio Lopez Padierna, and Daniel Fahy. A final thank you to Captain Lance Robinson and Brian Buskirk for providing reliable vessels for our many field days.
Description: This shapefile is all sand habitat mapped in the region and is a combination of the most recent SE FL benthic habitat maps. The nearshore has been updated according to Walker and Klug 2014 and combined with all previous mapping efforts.
The SE FL nearshore benthic habitats were mapped using the same combined technique approach as described in Walker, Riegl, and Dodge (2008). Polygons were created by outlining and defining the features at a 1:1,000 scale and minimum mapping unit of 0.1 ha within recent aerial photography and high resolution bathymetric survey data. Southeast Florida benthic habitat maps were produced by delineating seafloor features evident in multiple datasets including the GMR Aerial Surveys, Inc. dba Photo Scienceimagery collected for this purpose on March 8, 2013, 2008 Broward lidar, and 2009 NOAA bathymetry. This dataset built upon previous regional mapping efforts by Dr. Brian Walker at Nova Southeastern University. The habitats were classified according to established NOAA guidelines in coordination with the NOS Coral Mapping Program and use a similar classification scheme when possible.
Copyright Text: This work was prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) by Nova Southeastern University. Funding for this report was provided in part by a Coastal Services Center grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Ocean Service Award No. NA11N0S4820003, and by the Department, through its Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas. The total cost of the project was $248,611.00, of which 100 percent was provided by the NOAA. The views, statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the State of Florida, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, or any of its subagencies. Thank you to Florida Department of Environmental Protection Southeast Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center, and the South Florida Coral Reef Initiative for supporting this effort. Thanks to NOAA Office of Coast Survey, Broward County Natural Resources Planning and Management Division, and Coastal Planning and Engineering for supplying the LIDAR data. We especially would like to thank Amanda Costaregni and Ian Rodericks of the Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center (NSUOC) Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Ecology lab and Dr. David Gilliam and his NSUOC Coral Reef Restoration, Assessment & Monitoring Lab, for the many hours spent underwater to aid in the completion of data collection for this project, including Nicole D’Antonio, Ariel Halperin, Chuck Walton, Kathryn Binder, Cody Bliss, Lystina Kabay, Mauricio Lopez Padierna, and Daniel Fahy. A final thank you to Captain Lance Robinson and Brian Buskirk for providing reliable vessels for our many field days.
Description: This shapefile is all seagrass habitat mapped in the region and is a combination of the most recent SE FL benthic habitat maps. The nearshore has been updated according to Walker and Klug 2014 and combined with all previous mapping efforts.
The SE FL nearshore benthic habitats were mapped using the same combined technique approach as described in Walker, Riegl, and Dodge (2008). Polygons were created by outlining and defining the features at a 1:1,000 scale and minimum mapping unit of 0.1 ha within recent aerial photography and high resolution bathymetric survey data. Southeast Florida benthic habitat maps were produced by delineating seafloor features evident in multiple datasets including the GMR Aerial Surveys, Inc. dba Photo Scienceimagery collected for this purpose on March 8, 2013, 2008 Broward lidar, and 2009 NOAA bathymetry. This dataset built upon previous regional mapping efforts by Dr. Brian Walker at Nova Southeastern University. The habitats were classified according to established NOAA guidelines in coordination with the NOS Coral Mapping Program and use a similar classification scheme when possible.
Copyright Text: This work was prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) by Nova Southeastern University. Funding for this report was provided in part by a Coastal Services Center grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Ocean Service Award No. NA11N0S4820003, and by the Department, through its Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas. The total cost of the project was $248,611.00, of which 100 percent was provided by the NOAA. The views, statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the State of Florida, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, or any of its subagencies. Thank you to Florida Department of Environmental Protection Southeast Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center, and the South Florida Coral Reef Initiative for supporting this effort. Thanks to NOAA Office of Coast Survey, Broward County Natural Resources Planning and Management Division, and Coastal Planning and Engineering for supplying the LIDAR data. We especially would like to thank Amanda Costaregni and Ian Rodericks of the Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center (NSUOC) Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Ecology lab and Dr. David Gilliam and his NSUOC Coral Reef Restoration, Assessment & Monitoring Lab, for the many hours spent underwater to aid in the completion of data collection for this project, including Nicole D’Antonio, Ariel Halperin, Chuck Walton, Kathryn Binder, Cody Bliss, Lystina Kabay, Mauricio Lopez Padierna, and Daniel Fahy. A final thank you to Captain Lance Robinson and Brian Buskirk for providing reliable vessels for our many field days.
Description: This shapefile is all dense Acropora cervicornis patches mapped in the region and is a combination of the most recent SE FL benthic habitat maps. The nearshore has been updated according to Walker and Klug 2014 and combined with all previous mapping efforts.
The SE FL nearshore benthic habitats were mapped using the same combined technique approach as described in Walker, Riegl, and Dodge (2008). Polygons were created by outlining and defining the features at a 1:1,000 scale and minimum mapping unit of 0.1 ha within recent aerial photography and high resolution bathymetric survey data. Southeast Florida benthic habitat maps were produced by delineating seafloor features evident in multiple datasets including the GMR Aerial Surveys, Inc. dba Photo Scienceimagery collected for this purpose on March 8, 2013, 2008 Broward lidar, and 2009 NOAA bathymetry. This dataset built upon previous regional mapping efforts by Dr. Brian Walker at Nova Southeastern University. The habitats were classified according to established NOAA guidelines in coordination with the NOS Coral Mapping Program and use a similar classification scheme when possible.
Copyright Text: This work was prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) by Nova Southeastern University. Funding for this report was provided in part by a Coastal Services Center grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Ocean Service Award No. NA11N0S4820003, and by the Department, through its Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas. The total cost of the project was $248,611.00, of which 100 percent was provided by the NOAA. The views, statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the State of Florida, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, or any of its subagencies. Thank you to Florida Department of Environmental Protection Southeast Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center, and the South Florida Coral Reef Initiative for supporting this effort. Thanks to NOAA Office of Coast Survey, Broward County Natural Resources Planning and Management Division, and Coastal Planning and Engineering for supplying the LIDAR data. We especially would like to thank Amanda Costaregni and Ian Rodericks of the Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center (NSUOC) Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Ecology lab and Dr. David Gilliam and his NSUOC Coral Reef Restoration, Assessment & Monitoring Lab, for the many hours spent underwater to aid in the completion of data collection for this project, including Nicole D’Antonio, Ariel Halperin, Chuck Walton, Kathryn Binder, Cody Bliss, Lystina Kabay, Mauricio Lopez Padierna, and Daniel Fahy. A final thank you to Captain Lance Robinson and Brian Buskirk for providing reliable vessels for our many field days.
Description: This GIS data set represents Southeast Coral Reef Evaluation & Monitoring Project (SECREMP) categories based on current coral cover and coral cover trends.
This product was funded by the Florida's State Wildlife Grants Program under the project "Identification of suitable coral restoration sites and resilient coral reef communities through assessment of existing coral monitoring data." 2014/2016. Principle investigators were Luke McEachron, Kate Lunz, and Katie Wirt. This project used input from the scientific community to predict and assess actionable locations for coral restoration. This layer was one component of a larger modeling effort, but it can be used independently for other purposes.
Copyright Text: FWC and Florida's State Wildlife Grants Program. Principle investigators were Luke McEachron, Kate Lunz, and Katie Wirt.
Description: This layer was created from the 2012 Florida Administrative Code 18-21 Sovereignty Submerged Lands Management. Points were plotted from the code and lines were drawn between them to illustrate the gap. The code reads as follows: (l) Applications for telecommunication lines received after October 29, 2003 that originate from or extend to locations outside of the state’s territorial limits through the territorial sea including the area between mean high and mean low water lines and any associated conduits shall be subject to the following: 1. Installations shall be approved only where the applicant provides satisfactory evidence of a need by providing documentation in the form of: a. A copy of their Federal Communications Commission cable landing license; and either b. A contract to install telecommunication lines and associated conduits to an upland distribution network and stating the projected date of installation; or c. A letter of commitment from a company in the business of installing or using telecommunication lines for a line that will be installed and connected to an upland distribution network, functional for transmitting data, and on-line within a specified time frame once a conduit is made available.
2. Installations at individual landing sites are limited to no more than six telecommunication lines and conduits except where the applicant can affirmatively demonstrate that the landing site will support a larger number of such lines and that the routing to the State’s territorial limits within the territorial sea will cause no more than minimal individual and cumulative impacts. However, installations using subconduits within a conduit shall be allowed up to six subconduits and one additional conduit. In no case shall more than two conduits with subconduits be authorized until such time as the capacity of one conduit is fully utilized for telecommunication line installation. 3. Installations shall be prohibited on or under submerged lands within Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve, Biscayne Bay National Park, and Monroe County. 4. Conduits for telecommunication lines shall be directionally drilled under nearshore benthic resources, including the first reef and any other more inshore reefs off Southeast Florida, to the maximum extent practicable and shall punch out in a location that avoids or minimizes impacts to benthic resources such as seagrasses and live bottom communities including corals and sponges. 5. While locating in these areas is not required for approval, special consideration areas are designated for telecommunication lines and associated conduits located within the reef-gaps generally described as follows, based on World Geodetic System 84.
a. Lake Worth Gap (northern Palm Beach County), beginning at the easternmost end at N. Lat. 26 37.659/W. Long. 80 01.341 (south side) to N. Lat. 26 38.481/W. Long. 80 01.258 (north side), in a 1,672 yard-wide gap. b. South Lake Worth Inlet Gap (central Palm Beach County), beginning at the easternmost end at N. Lat. 26 32.492/W. Long. 80 01.610 (south side) to N. Lat. 26 32.444/W. Long. 80 01.626 (north side), in a 100 yard-wide gap. c. Delray Gap (southern Palm Beach County), beginning at the easternmost end at N. Lat. 26 27.393/W. Long. 80 02.765 (south side) to N. Lat. 26 27.641/W. Long. 80 02.726 (north side), in a 508 yard-wide gap. d. Sea Turtle Gap (southern Palm Beach County), beginning at the easternmost end at N. Lat. 26 22.672/W. Long. 80 03.224 (south side) to N. Lat. 26 22.748/W. Long. 80 03.224 (north side), in a 154 yard-wide gap. e. South Broward Gap (southern Broward County), beginning at the easternmost end at N. Lat. 25 58.438/W. Long. 80 05.278 (south side) and N. Lat. 25 58.821/W. Long. 80 05.271 (north side) and extending westerly on its southerly limits through the following points: N. Lat. 25 58.977/W. Long. 80 05.733, N. Lat. 25 59.132/W. Long. 80 05.997, and ending at N. Lat. 25 59.138/ W. Long. 80 06.366, and westerly on its northerly limits through the following points: N. Lat. 25 59.039/W. Long. 80 05.725, N. Lat. 25 59.205/W. Long. 80 06.060, and ending at N. Lat. 25 59.192/W. Long. 80 06.371.
Copyright Text: Walker, B.K. Nova Southeastern University
Description: The TIGER/Line Files are shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) that are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line File is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. The primary legal divisions of most States are termed counties. In Louisiana, these divisions are known as parishes. In Alaska, which has no counties, the equivalent entities are the organized boroughs, city and boroughs, and municipalities, and for the unorganized area, census areas. The latter are delineated cooperatively for statistical purposes by the State of Alaska and the Census Bureau. In four States (Maryland, Missouri, Nevada, and Virginia), there are one or more incorporated places that are independent of any county organization and thus constitute primary divisions of their States. These incorporated places are known as independent cities and are treated as equivalent entities for purposes of data presentation. The District of Columbia and Guam have no primary divisions, and each area is considered an equivalent entity for purposes of data presentation. The Census Bureau treats the following entities as equivalents of counties for purposes of data presentation: Municipios in Puerto Rico, Districts and Islands in American Samoa, Municipalities in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Islands in the U.S. Virgin Islands. The entire area of the United States, Puerto Rico, and the Island Areas is covered by counties or equivalent entities. The 2010 Census boundaries for counties and equivalent entities are as of January 1, 2010, primarily as reported through the Census Bureau's Boundary and Annexation Survey (BAS).
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Name: Extractive Diving (SCUBA and free) Activities
Display Field: UniqueID
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. An overlap layer has also been created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequent and the estimated intensity of this overlap.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Name: Recreational Fishing and Diving Activity Overlap
Display Field: UniqueID
Type: Feature Layer
Geometry Type: esriGeometryPolygon
Description: The Our Florida Reefs survey collected data on how and where southeast Florida’s coral reefs are being visited by residents and guests. All survey participants’ data have been combined to create maps that show a summary of where people are visiting the reefs, what activities they are participating in, and how often those areas are visited.
The survey used a non-probability based “Opt-In” sample methodology that engaged ocean and coastal recreation stakeholders by deploying targeted outreach strategies to solicit participation in an opt-in method of data collection. Respondents were asked to provide information and map their coastal and ocean recreation activities from the last 12 months. Collecting data using an internet “opt-in” mode provides many advantages. It gathers data from populations that are not well defined and in which a robust probability based sample cannot be developed or feasibly collected. It provides a participatory approach and engages and builds stakeholder investment. It also provides the ability to collect data and obtain larger sample sizes from specific user groups (e.g. SCUBA divers, kayakers, etc.) that are difficult to adequately capture in general population surveys. Lastly, it increases the likelihood that stakeholders will trust the survey results and therefore accept their use in policy-making processes.
Based on this opt-in method, the data could not be extrapolated to the general population, however it provides spatial data on many activities, as well as activity participation rates, and average expenditure profiles. Maps depicting spatial patterns of use (extent and intensity of use) for specific coastal recreational activities were created. These maps are aggregated into activity groupings requested by the Community Working Group members to help facilitate their use in planning and policy contexts. The final activity groupings are boating, recreational fishing, SCUBA diving, spearfishing, extractive diving, and water sports. This overlap layer was created to show locations where both fishers and divers frequented and the estimated intensity of this overlap. This layer only contains planning units where both fishing and diving were reported. The number of visits for each activity were used to determine whether it was high fishing, high diving or nearly equal. The high fishing bin includes values from -190 to -21, the moderate fishing bin includes values from -20 to -6, the equal fishing and diving bin includes values from -5 to 5, the moderate diving bin includes values from 6 to 200, and the high diving bin includes values from 201 to 643.
Copyright Text: Walker, B. & Costaregni, A. (Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center), Crowther, D., Fletcher, S., Chen, C. (Point97), and Water, L. (FDEP)
Description: A Site is a location that is typically associated with one or more functionally related Water Management System components (e.g., structures) or monitoring stations or control stations in proximity to one another. A Site can be defined for different purposes. Site boundaries may or may not be explicitly defined and may or may not overlap.
Copyright Text: South Florida Water Management District
Description: The data was created to serve as base information for use in GIS systems for a variety of planning and analytical purposes. This dataset contains city limits for the State of Florida. The data was compiled by the GeoPlan Center using tax code boundaries as defined in 2010 county parcel data from the Florida Department of Revenue (FDOR). This dataset is an update to the city limits shapefile par_citylm_2010.shp.
Copyright Text: Florida Department of Revenue and the 67 - County Property Appraisers.
Description: This shapefile is all coral reef and hard bottom habitat mapped in the region and is a combination of the most recent SE FL benthic habitat maps. The nearshore has been updated according to Walker and Klug 2014 and combined with all previous mapping efforts.
Copyright Text: This work was prepared for the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (Department) by Nova Southeastern University. Funding for this report was provided in part by a Coastal Services Center grant from the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Ocean Service Award No. NA11N0S4820003, and by the Department, through its Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas. The total cost of the project was $248,611.00, of which 100 percent was provided by the NOAA. The views, statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the State of Florida, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, or any of its subagencies. Thank you to Florida Department of Environmental Protection Southeast Office of Coastal and Aquatic Managed Areas, the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center, and the South Florida Coral Reef Initiative for supporting this effort. Thanks to NOAA Office of Coast Survey, Broward County Natural Resources Planning and Management Division, and Coastal Planning and Engineering for supplying the LIDAR data. We especially would like to thank Amanda Costaregni and Ian Rodericks of the Nova Southeastern University Oceanographic Center (NSUOC) Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Ecology lab and Dr. David Gilliam and his NSUOC Coral Reef Restoration, Assessment & Monitoring Lab, for the many hours spent underwater to aid in the completion of data collection for this project, including Nicole D’Antonio, Ariel Halperin, Chuck Walton, Kathryn Binder, Cody Bliss, Lystina Kabay, Mauricio Lopez Padierna, and Daniel Fahy. A final thank you to Captain Lance Robinson and Brian Buskirk for providing reliable vessels for our many field days.
Description: Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Boundary. "Designated on November 16, 1990, Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary is one of 14 marine protected areas that make up the National Marine Sanctuary System. Administered by NOAA, a federal agency, and jointly managed with the State of Florida, Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary protects 2,900 square nautical miles of waters surrounding the Florida Keys, from south of Miami westward to encompass the Dry Tortugas, excluding Dry Tortugas National Park. The shoreward boundary of the sanctuary is the mean high-water mark, essentially meaning that once you set foot in Keys waters, you have entered the sanctuary.
Within the boundaries of the sanctuary lie spectacular, unique, and nationally significant marine resources, from the world’s third largest barrier reef, extensive seagrass beds, mangrove-fringed islands, and more than 6,000 species of marine life. The sanctuary also protects pieces of our nation’s history such as shipwrecks and other archeological treasures." (http://floridakeys.noaa.gov/about)
Description: Essential Fish Habitiat (EFH) that is judged to be particularly important to the long-term productivity of populations of one or more managed species, or to be particularly vulnerable to degradation, should be identified as "habitat areas of particular concern" (HAPC) to help provide additional focus for conservation efforts. As a result of the Sustainable Fisheries Act Amendment to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act in 1996 the Councils and the NMFS have been mandated to use an ecosystem approach in managing the Nation's Fisheries. The Council has taken the first step with the approval of the Habitat Plan identifying and describing in detail essential fish habitat (EFH) for species managed throughout the South Atlantic and with the approval of the Comprehensive Habitat Amendment amending all existing FMPs to include descriptions of EFH and EFH-habitat areas of particular concern (EFH-HAPCs).
Description: Locations of mooring buoys in the SEFCRI region provided by various sources.To help protect our coral reefs, Florida law prohibits dropping an anchor onto living corals. As further protection, a mooring buoy system was installed so that boaters can moor on reefs without using an anchor and avoid violating the law or damaging the reef. Miami-Dade County mooring buoys are maintained by the Restoration and Enhancement Section in the Regulatory and Economic Resources Department. Funding was provided by the County and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission’s Florida Boater Improvement Program. Broward County mooring buoys are maintained by the Natural Resources Planning and Management Division. Funding was provided by the County and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program. The Palm Beach County mooring buoy program is a partnership between Palm Beach County Department of Environmental Resources Management and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Funding was provided by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program. Mooring buoys in Palm Beach County at Mar A Lago and Boca Raton Patch reefs are rotated every year to spread the pressure out of divers and fishermen over different parts of the reefs.The St. Lucie Inlet Park Preserve Mooring Buoys are maintained by the Florida Park Service. Funding was provided by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Coral Reef Conservation Program with a grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Conservation Program.
Copyright Text: Costaregni, A. & Walker, B. (2015)
Color: [0, 0, 0, 255] Background Color: N/A Outline Color: N/A Vertical Alignment: bottom Horizontal Alignment: center Right to Left: false Angle: 0 XOffset: 0 YOffset: 0 Size: 10 Font Family: Arial Font Style: normal Font Weight: normal Font Decoration: none
Description: Established by the FWC under a Florida Administration Code rule to protect important wildlife concentrations from human disturbance during critical periods of their life cycles, such as nesting.(1) Critical wildlife areas may be established by the Commission with prior concurrence in such designation by the owner of the property wherein the area is situated. All areas shall be described in the order with sufficient specificity as to permit identification and shall be posted by the Commission so as to provide due notice as to the identity and status of the area. The order establishing the critical wildlife area shall contain the dates during which the tract shall be accorded maximum protection from human or vehicular disturbance. (2) No person shall take or disturb any wildlife within any critical wildlife area during the period designated by the order establishing such area. No person shall enter or operate a vehicle within any critical wildlife area during any period in which public access is prohibited by the order establishing such area. No person shall knowingly allow a dog under their care to enter or remain upon a critical wildlife area during any period in which public access is prohibited by the order establishing such area.
Copyright Text: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
Description: The Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative (SEFCRI) is a local action strategy for collaborative action among government and non-governmental partners to identify and implement priority actions needed to reduce key threats to coral reef resources in southeast Florida. The targeted area includes Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties.
The FDEP CRCP coordinates research, monitoring, and response to coral reef injuries, develops management strategies, and promotes partnerships and stakeholder participation to advance protection of Florida’s reefs. Through its role in supporting Florida’s membership on the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force, and the U.S. All Islands Committee, the FDEP CRCP leads the implementation of the SEFCRI.
Description: This boundary includes the SEFCRI region but also extends further offshore in the northern half to include the offshore reefs in Martin and north Palm Beach Counties. It is also extended slightly north and southeast to include areas that were identified as "areas of interest". These areas were identified as areas that should be considered for additional protection. Hosted by the Southeast Florida Coral Reef Initiative (SEFCRI), this planning process brings together the community of local residents, reef users, business owners, visitors and the broader public in Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, and Martin counties to discuss the future of coral reefs in this region. This process is designed to increase public involvement in the future management of southeast Florida’s coral reefs by seeking input from community members on the development of recommendations that can become part of a comprehensive management strategy to ensure healthy coral reefs in the future.
The planning process includes the offshore reefs in the four-county region, from north of Biscayne National Park in Miami-Dade County to the St. Lucie Inlet in Martin County.
Description: Marine organism diversity typically attenuates latitudinally from tropical to colder climate regimes. Since the distribution of many marine species relates to certain habitats and depth regimes, mapping data provide valuable information in the
absence of detailed ecological data that can be used to identify and spatially quantify smaller scale (10 s km) coral reef ecosystem regions and potential physical biogeographic barriers. This study focused on the southeast Florida coast due to a recognized, but understudied, tropical to subtropical biogeographic gradient. GIS spatial analyses were conducted on recent, accurate, shallow-water (0–30 m) benthic habitat maps to identify and quantify specific regions along the coast that were statistically distinct in the number and amount of major benthic habitat types. Habitat type and width were measured
for 209 evenly-spaced cross-shelf transects. Evaluation of groupings from a cluster analysis at 75% similarity yielded five distinct regions. The number of benthic habitats and their area, width, distance from shore, distance from each other, and LIDAR depths were calculated in GIS and examined to determine regional statistical differences. The number of benthic habitats decreased with increasing latitude from 9 in the south to 4 in the north and many of the habitat metrics statistically differed between regions. Three potential biogeographic barriers were found at the Boca, Hillsboro, and Biscayne boundaries, where specific shallow-water habitats were absent further north; Middle Reef, Inner Reef, and oceanic seagrass beds respectively. The Bahamas Fault Zone boundary was also noted where changes in coastal morphologies occurred that
could relate to subtle ecological changes. The analyses defined regions on a smaller scale more appropriate to regional management decisions, hence strengthening marine conservation planning with an objective, scientific foundation for decision making. They provide a framework for similar regional analyses elsewhere.
Copyright Text: Walker BK (2012) Spatial Analyses of Benthic Habitats to Define Coral Reef Ecosystem Regions and Potential Biogeographic Boundaries along a