BCMCA_ECO_VascPlants_Estuaries_Data

Metadata also available as

Metadata:

Identification_Information
Data_Quality_Information
Spatial_Data_Organization_Information
Spatial_Reference_Information
Entity_and_Attribute_Information
Distribution_Information
Metadata_Reference_Information

Identification_Information:

Citation:

Citation_Information:

Originator:

The British Columbia Marine Conservation Analysis (BCMCA), a Tides Canada Initiatives Project

Publication_Date: November, 2009

Title: BCMCA_ECO_VascPlants_Estuaries_Data

Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: vector digital data

Series_Information:

Series_Name: Ecological Data

Publication_Information:

Publisher: BCMCA

Online_Linkage:

\\CARRIE\E\Andy_Bcmca\data_processed_namedStandardized\Plants\salt_marsh_update_nov2009.mdb

Description:

Abstract:: The British Columbia Marine Conservation Analysis (BCMCA) is a collaborative project assembling and analyzing spatial information about Canada's Pacific Ocean. The overall goal of the BCMCA is to identify marine areas of high conservation value and marine areas important to human use. Results of the project are intended to inform and help advance marine planning initiatives in BC by providing collaborative, peer-reviewed scientific analyses based on the best ecological and human use spatial data at scales relevant to a BC coast-wide analysis.
Purpose:: The purpose of this dataset is to identify the salt marsh feature identified in the BCMCA Marine Plant Workshop's Vascular Plant group.
Supplemental_Information:: This is a final dataset comprised of data from 2 sources:
-Pacific Estuary Conservation Program (PECP) Identified Estuaries of BC mapping and ranking project [PECP_estuarypolys_with_ranking_March2007.shp] -Province of BC / Environment Canada (Canadian Wildlife Service): Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory [marsh_500 - SEI feature class]
Relative Importance - Marxan ID Low - 5315 Med-Low - 5314 Med - 5313 Med-High - 5312 High - 5311

Time_Period_of_Content:

Time_Period_Information:

Single_Date/Time:

Calendar_Date: 1997, 2005

Currentness_Reference: publication date

Status:

Progress: Complete
Maintenance_and_Update_Frequency: None planned

Spatial_Domain:

Bounding_Coordinates:

West_Bounding_Coordinate: -133.464103
East_Bounding_Coordinate: -122.183784
North_Bounding_Coordinate: 56.000725
South_Bounding_Coordinate: 48.159755

Keywords:

Theme:

Theme_Keyword_Thesaurus:: REQUIRED: Reference to a formally registered thesaurus or a similar authoritative source of theme keywords.
Theme_Keyword: Cliffs
Theme_Keyword: Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory

Place:

Place_Keyword: Sunshine Coast
Place_Keyword: Southern Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands
Place_Keyword: Bowen Island

Access_Constraints:

This dataset is subject to the terms and conditions of the data use agreements for the source datasets.

Use_Constraints:

This dataset is subject to the terms and conditions of the data use agreements for the source datasets.

Point_of_Contact:

Contact_Information:

Contact_Person_Primary:

Contact_Person: Karin Bodtker
Contact_Organization: BCMCA

Contact_Position: Project Co-Chair

Contact_Voice_Telephone: (604) 696-5044

Data_Set_Credit: Province of BC / Environment Canada (Canadian Wildlife Service)

Native_Data_Set_Environment:

Microsoft Windows XP Version 5.1 (Build 2600) Service Pack 2; ESRI ArcCatalog 9.3.1.3500

Data_Quality_Information:

Lineage:

Source_Information:

Source_Contribution:: Pacific Estuary Conservation Program (PECP) Identified Estuaries of BC mapping and ranking project [PECP_estuarypolys_with_ranking_March2007.shp]

Source_Information:

Source_Contribution:: Province of BC / Environment Canada (Canadian Wildlife Service): Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory

Process_Step:

Process_Description:

The following subclass was extracted from the SEI records for Southern Vancouver Island and the Gulf Islands and Bowen Island: From Wetland - WN:ms - Marsh The polygons within 500 m of the TRIM coastline were then selected.
The following TEM code was extracted from the SEI records for the Sunshine Coast: EM - Estuarine Marsh.
Shapefiles were created from each extract.

Process_Date: August 2009

Process_Contact:

Contact_Information:

Contact_Person_Primary:

Contact_Person: Dave Nicolson
Contact_Organization: BCMCA

Contact_Position: Project Manager

Process_Step:

Process_Description:

The SEI shapefiles for each region were merged together into a single feature class

Process_Date: August 2009

Process_Contact:

Contact_Information:

Contact_Person_Primary:

Contact_Person: Carrie Robb
Contact_Organization: Living Oceans Society (for BCMCA)

Contact_Position: GIS Specialist

Process_Step:

Process_Description:

The following is a description of the processing for the PECP Identified estuaries [PECP_estuarypolys_with_ranking_March2007.shp]. The methods used to identify and produce point locations for each estuary were as follows: Extract the double-lined TRIM river/streams (fcode attribute = GA90000110 left bank or GA90000120 right bank) from TRIM mapsheets. Select where double-lined river/stream fcodes intersect coastline (fcode attribute = GG05800000 for "definite" coastline, fcode attribute = GG95800130 for "indefinite" coastline, or fcode attribute = GE14850000 for "islands"). Hanging double-lined river/streams from TRIM that would normally intersect the coastline if they continued were included. The point locations from these queries were identified as TRIM estuaries. The Watershed Atlas (WSA) was queried for ? 4th order river/stream intersections (from L_order field) with WSA coastline (fcode attribute = WA21100000 coastline, or WA21100111 construction line, coastline). The point locations from these queries were identified as WSA estuaries. The rationale for using these queries was that they would: (a) capture the larger estuary systems and complexes in the province, and (b) keep the project manageable from a time commitment standpoint. For comparison, a query of ? 3rd order river/streams from the WSA located approximately 750 total sites; including these additional areas would have added substantially to the required digitizing time. It is also likely that many of these sites are small streams that might not be considered estuaries. Locating additional estuaries from a query of river/stream magnitude within the WSA was considered, but it was undecided as to what an appropriate "magnitude" would be to locate additional estuaries that were not already located from the two main queries. For individual estuaries with duplicate or multiple query "hits" resulting from (a) both TRIM and WSA identified intersections, or (b) the presence of ? 1 channel for a given river/stream, where multiple intersections with coastline were possible, one point was retained as an identifier for each river/stream. Each identified river/stream from the queries was referred to as the primary river/stream; other river/streams or ditches that entered the primary river/stream or coastline were referred to as secondary river/streams. Point locations for an additional seven estuaries identified by CWS, Hunter et al. (1985), or other method were also included. These additional sites were not located on the queries. The attribute tables contain information on whether the estuaries were identified by TRIM, WSA, CWS, Hunter et al. (1985), other method, or a combination of these. Several of the located estuaries did not have a river/stream name associated with them. In these cases, the estuary was given a name coinciding with the nearest geographic reference point to the river/stream. These names included references to points, bays, coves, sounds, lakes, inlets, islands, islets, lagoons, basins, bights, etc. In a few cases, a name could not be assigned to an estuary and it was recorded as Unnamed. The closest geographic reference point and general direction to that point was recorded in the comments field for unnamed estuaries. The methods used to map estuary systems and estuary complexes were as follows: Each identified estuary (n=435 from queries, + 7 additional added by PECP) was captured and digitized as per PECP mapping specifications and guidelines detailed in Ryder et al. (2004) unpublished document. The map layers used to capture, digitize and verify estuary features were 1:20,000 TRIM I&II, 1:50,000 NTS Watershed Atlas, 1:variable scale CHS charts, 1:variable scale NDI digital raster charts (BSB v.3.0 2000), 1:20,000 TRIM orthophotos (various years, where available for feature verification), and 1:15,000 to 1:70,000 scale provincial airphotos (various years, where available for feature verification). Features for the Fraser, Serpentine/Nickomekl, and Campbell River (1) estuaries (lower mainland) were also included from Fraser River Estuary Management Plan (FREMP) polygons v.1.0 August 1998 (digitized in 1996-98, at 1:2,500 scale, from airphotos taken in 1986 and 1989). For the Fraser River estuary, features were also verified/included from TRIM ttrn coverage layer. TRIM was the primary reference layer for capturing and digitizing polygon features for most estuaries, with exceptions being the Fraser, Serpentine/Nickomekl, and Campbell River (1) estuaries (lower mainland) where FREMP was used as a primary reference layer. Required linework was transferred from TRIM twtr and tcvr layers, and included the following feature codes: [(GA90000110 (left bank), and GA90000120 (right bank), GA24850000 (river/stream "definite"), GA24850140 (river/stream "indefinite"), GA24850150 (river/stream "intermittent"), GA08800110 (ditch), GA08800130 (indefinite ditch), GG05800000 (coastline "definite"), GG95800130 (coastline "indefinite"), GE25850000 (sand/gravel bar), GC17100000 (Marsh area outline), GC30050000 (Swamp area outline), GE14850000 (island to scale), GB15300000 (lake definite), GB15300130 (lake indefinite), GB15300140 (lake intermittent), GA10450000 (falls-to scale), GE09400000 (dyke), GE03050110 (breakwall/breakwater-large), GE26250000 (seawall), GA08450000 (dam-section.top), GA98450100 (dam-section.bottom), and JA33750000 (wooded area)]. The 0 chart datum line and some CHS marsh areas that were not shown in TRIM were interpolated and digitized from NDI digital marine chart raster images using best available scales. For several estuaries, the digital charts showed no intertidal zone present, primarily where the chart scale comparisons were poor. NTS mapsheets were consulted for the presence of intertidal deltas in these cases; if an intertidal delta was shown it was digitized from the NTS sheet. The relevant polygons transferred from the FREMP layer included estuarine marsh, intertidal mudflat, and intertidal sandflat. FREMP riparian grass/shrub or riparian tree polygons shown in FREMP were excluded. All estuary features were captured and digitized at a scale of 1:10,000. All existing/digitized linework and polygons used to create the estuaries was sourced as TRIM, marine chart, NTS, buffer, FREMP or CWS. Estuary features were digitized as polylines in ArcView 3.2, and converted to polygons after digitizing was complete (except for FREMP features that were already shown as polygons). Common area boundaries for polygons were digitized only once. Relevant estuary features included marsh, swamp, islands, river/streams, ditches, sand/gravel bars, lakes, and intertidal areas (shown as mudflat, rock, gravel, and/or sand substrate on CHS charts). The estuary features captured within each river/stream system or complex (a complex being more than one river/stream sharing a common intertidal delta) included those found within the following zones: (a) the intertidal zone between the TRIM coastline and 0 chart datum contour line shown on NDI digital marine charts or NTS sheet, and (b) the supratidal and upstream zones, above the river/stream mouth(s) and TRIM coastline, to an upstream distance of 500m (see exceptions below for upstream limit of Fraser, Skeena, and Nass estuaries). The 500m upstream breakline used for most estuaries was based on an estimate of the maximum distance that surface salinity was detected upstream from the mouth of the Campbell River estuary on Vancouver Island (C. Levings, DFO, personal communication, 2002), and is consistent with the limit suggested by Durance, 2001 (C. Durance, Estuarine and Freshwater Habitat Classification: Templates, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Vancouver, BC. Unpublished report, 2001). Subtidal estuary features, forested areas, and other upland areas were not included in the estuary mapping. In this version of the estuary mapping, slope of the river/stream was not considered in developing criteria to delineate upstream breaklines. The rationale for not considering slope in developing breakline criteria was: (a) TRIM depicts broad slope classes that are not particularly useful for defining/delineating upstream breaklines, and (b) For most estuary systems, the upstream river area contributes little to the cumulative estuary area anyway, so the exact location of the breakline is relatively unimportant in this respect (the majority of area is contributed by intertidal zone). For three large estuary systems, the Fraser, Skeena, and Nass, a 500m upstream breakpoint was not considered a reasonable approximation of the upstream extent of salinity intrusion. Data on upstream surface salinity concentrations for the Fraser and Skeena were obtained from DFO/IOS to quantify an approximate upstream limit of saltwater intrusion to delineate a more appropriate breakline for these areas. This breakline was applied to that portion of the river described as the limnetic or non-tidal zone, with <0.5 parts salt per unit mass of seawater (Elliott and McLusky, 2002). Breaklines were delineated as follows: 1) Fraser River: South and Main arm breakline created at east end of Annacis Island (salinity data from Ages, 1988, Ages and Woollard, 1994), 2) Skeena River: breakline created at confluence of Ecstall and Skeena River (salinity data from Trites, 1956), and 3) Nass River: breakline created at confluence of Nass and Ishkseenickh River (<<NO SALINITY DATA AVAILABLE>>, freshwater influence from Ishkseenickh River was expected to dilute remaining saltwater). For the backshore/supratidal and upstream areas of each estuary system or complex, relevant linework or polygons that intersected or overlapped the river/stream banks were captured or digitized to the limit of the upstream breakline. Islands present between the river/stream banks, below the upstream breakline, were also captured (provided they were not a forest cover polygon from the tcvr layer, or islands with residential/commercial development present in the Fraser River). Backshore/supratidal features connected by single-lined features to the intertidal zone of the estuary, within the digitized boundary of the intertidal zone, were included provided the single- lined connecting feature was ? 500m in length. Single-lined TRIM river/streams, or other single-lined features within the estuary, were captured and a 10m buffer was digitized around them (5m buffer either side) to produce a closed polygon). TRIM defines a double-lined river/stream as >20m in width, and the 10m buffer around single-lined features represents an area half the width of the minimum distance for a double-lined river/stream. Within the intertidal delta shown on marine raster images, features were captured or digitized from existing linework or polygons. One or more of the following criteria were used to digitize breaklines to delineate the boundaries of each intertidal delta: (a) the point where the 0 chart datum line intersects TRIM coastline, (b) for a non-intersecting 0 chart datum contour line with TRIM coastline, the point where the contour line narrows to ? 120m distance from TRIM coastline (the rationale here is that previously a narrowing distance of 2mm as shown on CHS paper charts was used to create a breakline / the average CHS chart scale is 1:60,000, AND 2mm=120m at 1:60,000), (c) the location where coastline habitat changes are evidenced from any map layer (i.e. mudflat to rocky shoreline), (d) the location where coastline geographic features are present that create natural breakpoints (i.e. peninsulas, spits, jetty's), or (e) the location where a named secondary river/stream, not located on queries, is present and a breakline can be created midway to the named/river stream. These criteria were followed, in sequence, to delineate intertidal zone breaklines for each system or complex. Intertidal mapping criteria were applied effectively to all estuaries, with the exception of two sites: the Skeena and Tlell River estuaries. The Skeena River does not have a distinct intertidal delta typical of most estuary systems. In this system, suspended particles from the river are deposited in banks or shoals along, or in, the lower river and channels connecting the estuary with the open ocean, forming several intertidal deltas (Hoos, 1975). Each of the Skeena intertidal deltas was captured separately according to supplemental mapping criteria detailed in Ryder et al. (2004) unpublished document. For the Tlell River estuary, the available chart scale was poor (1:525,000) and the TRIM/NTS linework was offset from the chart at this location. An approximate intertidal zone was digitized here using an orthophoto. Any additional linework digitized by GIS technicians (i.e. buffers, intertidal zone breaklines between 0 chart datum lines and TRIM) was sourced as CWS linework. A detailed description of the estuary source locations, linework, and/or polygons for all mapped estuaries is available from the contact person at the CWS office in Delta, B.C. Full mapping specifications and supplemental mapping specifications for the Fraser, Serpentine/Nickomekl, Campbell River (1), Skeena, and Nass rivers, as noted above, are documented in the companion document to this metadata (J.L Ryder, K. Roger, K. Moore, and D. Buffett. Mapping specifications and guidelines for PECP identified estuaries in British Columbia. Canadian Wildlife Service, Delta, BC. Unpublished document, 2004). Additional mapping criteria for Fraser River, Serpentine/Nickomekl, and Campbell River (1) estuaries (using FREMP v.1.0 August 1998 and TRIM overlays): For the Fraser, Serpentine/Nickomekl, and Campbell River (1) estuaries (lower mainland region), FREMP was the primary reference layer for capturing relevant estuary polygons, using TRIM linework as an overlay. The relevant polygons included from the FREMP layer were estuarine marsh (EM), intertidal mudflat (IM), and intertidal sandflat (IS). Riparian grass/shrub or riparian tree polygons were clipped and excluded as donuts. FREMP polygons were reclassified according to the PECP mapping codes (i.e. estuarine marsh from FREMP would either be intertidal marsh or backshore marsh). The boundaries of FREMP intertidal mudflat and intertidal sandflat polygons, where present below or above TRIM left/right banks, dykes, islands, or coastline, were merged with the PECP estuary layer for the Fraser, Serpentine/Nickomekl, and Campbell River (1) estuaries. Areas that were not defined or captured by FREMP or TRIM were excluded as donuts; this applied to areas above TRIM islands, left/right banks, or coastline, and also included areas on TRIM islands, above or below the river mouth, that were not captured as FREMP estuarine marsh or intertidal mudflat/sandflat. All areas below TRIM islands, left/right banks, or coastline were captured as per existing criteria. If FREMP IM or IS intertidal polygons were completely contained within the PECP estuary layer boundaries for each site, below TRIM linework and above CHS 0 chart contour, the polygon boundaries were dissolved and/or erased and included as intertidal delta or upstream river. Where FREMP IM or IS polygon boundaries extended above TRIM linework, the polygon boundaries were left intact and the areas were included as either intertidal delta or upstream river. Where portions of FREMP intertidal polygons extended above TRIM coastline, below the river mouth, the feature boundaries were coded as intertidal delta. FREMP IM or IS polygons were separated/split at the Fraser, Serpentine/Nickomekl, and Campbell River (1) mouth breaklines, if portions of the polygons were present above and below the river mouths. Above the river mouths, all intact or split FREMP intertidal polygons were coded as upstream river, regardless of their location relative to TRIM islands, left/right banks, or dyke linework. Below the river mouths, all intact or split FREMP intertidal polygons were coded as intertidal delta, regardless of their location relative to TRIM islands or coastline linework. Upstream areas, that were not shown in FREMP, but were between TRIM left/right banks or below islands, were captured as per existing criteria and coded as upstream river (if not otherwise excluded as donuts). Intertidal areas, that were not shown in FREMP, but were below TRIM coastline and above CHS 0 chart datum, were captured as per existing criteria and coded as intertidal delta (if not otherwise excluded as donuts). Several small, disjointed polygons present below TRIM left/right banks or coastline, between FREMP polygons, were associated with larger upstream river or intertidal delta polygons rather than assigning unique id's to each. As a result, some ID or UR polygons have multipart features that would affect adjacency/perimeter analysis for these areas. FREMP EM polygons were captured as distinct areas with a unique identifier, regardless of their position relative to all TRIM linework, and coded as intertidal marsh or backshore marsh. If the majority of a given EM polygon was present below TRIM coastline or the river mouth, the ENTIRE polygon feature was coded as intertidal marsh. If the majority of a given EM polygon was present above TRIM coastline or the river mouth, the ENTIRE feature was coded as backshore marsh. All FREMP EM polygons upstream of the river mouth were coded as backshore marsh regardless of their position relative to TRIM linework. One swamp area was shown in TRIM for the Fraser River. The swamp area was partially overlapped by FREMP estuarine marsh; that portion covered by FREMP was coded as a backshore marsh polygon. The remainder of the TRIM swamp feature outside the FREMP estuarine marsh was coded as backshore swamp. No TRIM marsh linework was present in the Fraser, Serpentine/Nickomekl, or Campbell River (1) estuaries; thus FREMP EM polygons were the only marsh features captured. 99.2.5.1.4 Methodology Citation: See following companion document for detailed information on mapping criteria, field definitions, and attributes: Ryder, J.L., K. Roger, K. Moore, and D. Buffett. Mapping specifications and guidelines for PECP identified estuaries in British Columbia. Canadian Wildlife Service, Delta, BC. Unpublished document, 2004. Process date: April 2004 at time NA

Process_Contact:

Contact_Information:

Contact_Person_Primary:

Contact_Person: Kathleen Moore
Contact_Organization: Environment Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service

Contact_Voice_Telephone: (604) 940-4660

Contact_Facsimile_Telephone: (604) 946-7022

Contact_Electronic_Mail_Address: Kathleen.Moore@ec.gc.ca

Process_Step:

Process_Description:

A union was performed between [PECP_estuarypolys_with_ranking_March2007.shp] and [marsh_500 - feat class].

Process_Contact:

Contact_Information:

Contact_Person_Primary:

Contact_Person: Mathew Evans
Contact_Organization: BCMCA

Contact_Position: GIS Contractor

Process_Step:

Process_Description:

Using the field calculator all records from the SEI feature class (marsh - 500) were assigned an importance class of '5' ([IMP_CLASS] = '5') and one record for the Fraser River ([EST_NAME] ='Fraser River') was assigned an importance class of '1' ([IMP_CLASS] = '1').

Process_Contact:

Contact_Information:

Contact_Person_Primary:

Contact_Person: Mathew Evans
Contact_Organization: BCMCA

Contact_Position: GIS Contractor

Process_Step:

Process_Description:

The [ID] field was created an populated with new unique MARXAN IDs by using the Field Calculator to concatenate '531' and the value of [IMP_CLASS]. Expression: ID= 531 & [IMP_CLASS].

Process_Contact:

Contact_Information:

Contact_Person_Primary:

Contact_Person: Mathew Evans
Contact_Organization: BCMCA

Contact_Position: GIS Contractor

Process_Step:

Process_Description: The dataset was dissolved on the [IMP_CLASS] and [ID] fields.

Process_Date: November 2009

Process_Contact:

Contact_Information:

Contact_Person_Primary:

Contact_Person: Mathew Evans
Contact_Organization: BCMCA

Contact_Position: GIS Contractor

Spatial_Data_Organization_Information:

Direct_Spatial_Reference_Method: Vector

Point_and_Vector_Object_Information:

SDTS_Terms_Description:

SDTS_Point_and_Vector_Object_Type: G-polygon
Point_and_Vector_Object_Count: 5

Spatial_Reference_Information:

Horizontal_Coordinate_System_Definition:

Planar:

Map_Projection:

Map_Projection_Name: Albers Conical Equal Area

Albers_Conical_Equal_Area:

Standard_Parallel: 50.000000
Standard_Parallel: 58.500000
Longitude_of_Central_Meridian: -126.000000
Latitude_of_Projection_Origin: 45.000000
False_Easting: 1000000.000000
False_Northing: 0.000000

Planar_Coordinate_Information:

Planar_Coordinate_Encoding_Method: coordinate pair

Coordinate_Representation:

Abscissa_Resolution: 0.000100
Ordinate_Resolution: 0.000100

Planar_Distance_Units: meters

Geodetic_Model:

Horizontal_Datum_Name: North American Datum of 1983
Ellipsoid_Name: Geodetic Reference System 80
Semi-major_Axis: 6378137.000000
Denominator_of_Flattening_Ratio: 298.257222

Entity_and_Attribute_Information:

Detailed_Description:

Entity_Type:

Entity_Type_Label: BCMCA_ECO_VascPlants_Estuaries_Data

Attribute:

Attribute_Label: OBJECTID

Attribute_Definition: Internal feature number.

Attribute_Definition_Source: ESRI