GL_LAKE_ONTARIO_2023 ESI FISH Polygons, Points

These feature classes reside within the BIOLOGY Feature Data Set of the Lake Ontario 2023 ESI Geodatabase. It contains vector polygons and points representing FISH data for Lake Ontario.

The study area includes the United States portion of Lake Ontario, covering the islands in New York: Association Island, Bass Island, Calf Island, Carl Island, Cherry Island, Eagle Island, Fox Island, Galloo Islands, Grenadier Island, Horse Island, Hoveys Island, Six Point Town, and Stony Island. Major Lake Ontario bays mapped include: Black River Bay, Blind Sodus Bay, Braddock Bay, Chaumont Bay, Guffin Bay, Irondequoit Bay, Henderson Bay, Little Sodus Bay, Mexico Bay, Port Bay, Sawyer Bay, and Sodus Bay.

These data sets contain sensitive biological resource data for freshwater fish species in Lake Ontario. Vector polygons in this data set represent fish distribution, concentration areas, and spawning areas. Vector points in this data set represent fish spawning areas.

Species-specific abundance, seasonality, status, life history, and source information are stored in associated data tables (described in Entity Attribute Overview below) designed to be used in conjunction with this spatial data layer. This data set is a portion of the ESI data for Lake Ontario.

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.

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.

[THIS FIELD IS FOR INTERNAL NOTES AS NEEDED. IT WILL NOT BE VIEWABLE IN THE PUBLIC METADATA RECORD.]

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 attribute tables associated with the ESI biology data are BIOCOMB and SOURCES. The geographic data layers containing biological resource information (in this case, FISH & FISHPT) are linked to BIOCOMB using the RARNUM field. There is a many-to-many relationship from the data layer to the BIOCOMB, as an RARNUM may be repeated in several geographic features, and the BIOCOMB may have multiple records with the same RARNUM representing a variety of species, or a single species with differing attributes.

The items in the BIOCOMB are ELEMENT, SUBELEMENT, RARNUM, MAPRAR, SEASON_ID, NAME, GEN_SPEC, S, F, STATE, S_DATE, F_DATE, CONC, MAPPING_QUALIFIER, G_SOURCE, S_SOURCE, JAN, FEB, MAR, APR, MAY, JUN, JUL, AUG, SEP, OCT, NOV, DEC, NESTING, MIGRATING, MOLTING, HATCHING, SPAWNING, EGGS, LARVAE, JUVENILES, ADULTS, MATING, CALVING, PUPPING, AND INTERNESTING. The G_SOURCE and S_SOURCE fields provide links to the SOURCES table, where object level source information is available. The link to this table is 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 BIOCOMB to ease data queries and general usability of the final product.

Environmental Sensitivity Index Guidelines, Version 4.0 (Petersen, J., et al. 2019)

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.

This reflects the extent of all features included in the Great Lakes Lake Ontario 2023 ESI Geodatabase study region. The bounding box for this particular feature class may vary depending on occurrences identified and mapped.

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.

None

None

The software packages used to develop the atlas are Environmental Systems Research Institute's ArcGIS for Desktop(R), ArcPro(R), and SQL SERVER(R). The hardware configuration is PC's with Microsoft Windows Operating System.

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, check the sources listed in the Lineage section.

These data represent a synthesis of expert knowledge, digital data and hardcopy maps depicting fish distribution, concentration areas, and spawning areas. These data do not necessarily represent all fish occurrences in Lake Ontario. The following species are included in this data set: (Species_ID, Common Name, Scientific Name [n/a if not applicable]): 68, Chinook salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha; 69, Coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch; 74, Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss; 84, Rainbow smelt, Osmerus mordax; 85, Alewife, Alosa pseudoharengus; 98, American eel, Anguilla rostrata; 100, Brown trout, Salmo trutta; 144, Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar; 145, White perch, Morone americana; 152, Yellow perch, Perca flavescens; 161, Lake sturgeon, Acipenser fulvescens; 165, Lake whitefish, Coregonus clupeaformis; 166, Brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis; 167, Lake trout, Salvelinus namaycush; 169, Blackchin shiner, Notropis heterodon; 170, Blacknose shiner, Notropis heterolepis; 174, Longnose sucker, Catostomus catostomus; 175, White sucker, Catostomus commersoni; 179, Largemouth bass, Micropterus salmoides; 180, Smallmouth bass, Micropterus dolomieu; 185, Northern pike, Esox lucius; 186, Muskellunge, Esox masquinongy; 188, Walleye, Stizostedion vitreum vitreum; 190, White bass, Morone chrysops; 201, Channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus; 205, Freshwater drum, Aplodinotus grunnieus; 211, Brown bullhead, Ameiurus nebulosus; 232, Trout-perch, Percopsis omiscomaycus; 235, Cisco, Coregonus artedi; 237, Burbot, Lota lota; 242, Redfin shiner, Lythrurus umbratilis; 247, Emerald shiner, Notropis atherinoides; 464, Longnose gar, Lepisosteus osseus; 469, Pirate perch, Aphredoderus sayanus; 1011, Forage fish, n/a; 1013, Darters, n/a; 1151, Sunfishes, n/a; 1271, Slimy sculpin, Cottus cognatus; 1287, Eastern sand darter, Ammocrypta pellucida; 1291, Mooneye, Hiodon tergisus; 1297, Suckers, Catostomidae spp.; 1298, Deepwater sculpin, Myoxocephalus thompsonii; 1299, Redhorses, Moxostoma; 1300, Pugnose shiner, Notropis anogenus; 1303, Northern sunfish, Lepomis peltastes; 1304, Western banded killifish, Fundulus diaphanus menona.

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 complete 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.