Chesapeake Bay and the Outer Coasts of Maryland and Virginia 2016 ESI HERP (Reptile and Amphibian) Polygons

This data set contains sensitive biological resource data for sea turtles, estuarine turtles, and T/E herps in Chesapeake Bay and the Outer Coasts of Maryland and Virginia. Vector polygons in this data set represent herpetofauna distribtution and nesting areas. Species specific abundance, seasonality, status, life history, and source information are stored in relational data tables (described below) designed to be used in conjunction with this spatial data layer. This data set comprises a portion of the ESI data for Chesapeake Bay and the Outer Coasts of Maryland and Virginia. 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.

The ESI data were collected, mapped, and digitized to provide 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.

1649

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.

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.

The primary attribute tables associated with the ESI biology data are BIOFILE, SOURCES, and BREED_DT. The geographic data layer containing biological resource information (in this case, REPTILE & AMPHIBIAN POLYS) is linked to the BIOFILE using the RARNUM field. There is a many-to-many relationship from the data layer to the BIOFILE, as an RARNUM may be repeated in several geographic features. Likewise, in the BIOFILE, the same RARNUM may appear in multiple records, representing a unique combination of species found in that region. To be represented by the same RARNUM, these species groups must also share the same seasonality, concentration, mapping qualifier, and source information.

The items in the BIOFILE are ELEMENT, SUBELEMENT, NAME, GEN_SPEC, S, F, STATE, S_DATE, F_DATE, GRANK, GRANKDATE, MAPPING_QUALIFIER, CONC, JAN, FEB, MAR, APR, MAY, JUN, JUL, AUG, SEP, OCT, NOV, DEC, BREED1, BREED2, BREED3, BREED4, BREED5, RARNUM, G_SOURCE, S_SOURCE, and BREED. The G_SOURCE and S_SOURCE fields provide links to the SOURCES table, where object level source information is available. The BREED field is the link to the BREED_DT table, where searchable breed information is provided. The links to both of these tables are also many-to-many.

During the collection of the ESI data, six relational data tables are used to store the attribute data. These are the BIORES, BREED, SEASONAL, SOURCES, SPECIES, and STATUS tables. When we create new ESI data, we populate these tables to maintain the integrity of the data collected. Once completed, all information populating these tables is collapsed into the BIOFILE to ease data queries and general usability of the final product.

NOAA ESI Guidelines

Although these data have been processed successfully on a computer system at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 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, and will offer a replacement copy of the product when the product is determined unreadable by computer input peripherals, or when the physical medium is delivered in damaged condition.

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) and SQL SERVER(R) (version 2005). The hardware configuration is PC's 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.

Spatial components for the biological data layers can come from expert interviews, hardcopy, or digital sources. Some of the spatial components of the biological data layers may have been developed using regional experts who estimate concentration areas. It is difficult to estimate the positional accuracy of such data, except to state that they are compiled on hardcopy base maps with a scale of 1:24,000. Some of the spatial components of the biological data sets are developed from pre-existing digital or hardcopy sources and reflect the positional accuracy of these original data. Note that biological resource data by their very nature are considered "fuzzy", and this should be understood when considering the positional accuracy of vector digital objects representing these resources. See the Lineage and Process_Description sections for more information on the original source data and how these data were integrated or manipulated to create the final data set.

These data represent a synthesis of expert knowledge, available hardcopy documents, survey data, and digital data on herpetofauna distribtution and nesting areas. These data do not necessarily represent all herpetofauna occurrences in Chesapeake Bay and the Outer Coasts of Maryland and Virginia. The following species are included in this data set: (Species_ID, Common Name, Scientific Name [n/a if not applicable]): 2, Green sea turtle, Chelonia mydas; 4, Kemp's ridley sea turtle, Lepidochelys kempii; 5, Leatherback sea turtle, Dermochelys coriacea; 6, Loggerhead sea turtle, Caretta caretta; 7, Diamondback terrapin, Malaclemys terrapin; 114, Snapping turtle, Chelydra serpentina; 242, Barking treefrog, Hyla gratiosa; 243, Chicken turtle, Deirochelys reticularia.

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.

This atlas supersedes two separate first edition atlases, Virginia (2005, #25) and Maryland (2007, #47).