Massachusetts and Rhode Island 2016 HYDROP (Hydrography Polygons)

This data set contains vector polygons representing the coastal shoreline and hydrography used in the creation of the Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) for Massachusetts and Rhode Island. As a whole, the ESI data characterize the marine and coastal environments and wildlife by their sensitivity to spilled oil, and include information for three main components: shoreline habitats, sensitive biological resources, and human-use resources. See also the HYDROL (Hydrography Lines), ESIL (ESI Shoreline Types - Lines), ESIP (ESI Shoreline Types - Polygons) data layer for additional shoreline/hydrography information.

The ESI data are intended to provide baseline environmental data for oil spill planning and response. The Clean Water Act with amendments by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 requires response plans for immediate and effective protection of sensitive resources. The ESI data may be appropriate for many other coastal management efforts, though the original intent should be kept in mind.

Loaded by FGDC Metadata Uploader, batch 10447, 02-28-2018 15:27

The following FGDC sections are not currently supported in InPort, but were preserved and will be included in the FGDC export:

- Spatial Reference Information (FGDC:spref),

- Spatial Data Organization Information (FGDC:spdoinfo)

Data content is considered static once published. However, if issues with the Geodatabase linkages or table contents are identified, the Geodatabase and/or the associated Map Document may be updated. Assure most current data is being used by downloading from https://response.restoration.noaa.gov/esi_download and/or comparing modification dates provided at this site.

In addition to the geographic data layers, associated data tables are used to store information in the ESI data structure. See the Browse_Graphic section for a link to the entity-relationship diagram, which describes the relationships between attribute tables in the ESI data structure. This particular geographic data layer (HYDROP) does not link to other ESI tables.

NOAA ESI Guidelines

Although these data have been processed and used successfully on a computer system at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by NOAA regarding the utility of the data on any other system, nor shall the act of distribution constitute any such warranty. NOAA warrants the delivery of this product in computer-readable format. If problems are encountered in downloading the ESI data or with file corruption, contact NOAA (see Distributor). These data represent a snapshot in time and temporal changes may have occurred. The data are not intended to include all biological or human-use resources present in an area; they focus on species and resources particularly sensitive to oiling. In the event of a spill, they should be used for a first assessment only. The data providers are the experts with regard to individual resources. They should be contacted to confirm if more current data exist or if in-depth information is needed about a particular resource.

Data can be accessed by downloading the zipped ArcGIS geodatabase from the Download URL (see Distribution Information). Questions can be directed to the ESI Program Manager (Point Of Contact).

None

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

The software packages used to develop the atlas are Environmental Systems Research Institute's ArcGIS for Desktop 10.2(R). The hardware configuration is PCs with Windows Operating System 7.

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

These data represent polygonal hydrography for Massachusetts and Rhode Island. See also the HYDROL (Hydrography Lines), ESIL (ESI Shoreline Types - Lines), ESIP (ESI Shoreline Types - Polygons) data layers for additional shoreline/hydrography information.

A multi-stage error checking process, described in the above Attribute Accuracy Report, is used to verify both attribute accuracy and logical consistency throughout data production. This process includes multiple automated logical consistency checks that test the files for missing or duplicate data, rules for proper coding, GIS topological consistencies, and SQL SERVER(R) to ArcGIS(R) consistencies. A final review is made by the GIS manager, before the final Geodatabase and metadata are created. After the data are delivered to NOAA, they are again subjected to several consistency checks, and processed into the final delivery format.