Using GIS for Siting Artificial Reefs
129
This chapter has set out to examine a typical environmental project based
around the use of existing datasets with the intention of highlighting some of the
possible areas in which there are potential pitfalls for the unwary. It is clear that there
are many, particularly for the applications specialist who relies, out of necessity, on
archival datasets.
The conclusions of this chapter are that providing the researcher is made aware
of and recognises the potential pitfalls and attempts to take account of them in the study,
limiting the study to legitimate uses of the data, as outlined, then the existing
geographical datasets can be useful. However, if no account is taken of the limitations
of the data, then it becomes very difficult to have any confidence in the outcome of any
data analysis that makes use of these datasets.
The fact that there are few guidelines provided for those collecting data, and
few if any incentives at present to collect data in a standardised form means that many
datasets, which are potentially very valuable and useful will continue to have limited
use outside of the project for which they were originally gathered and intended. This
means that there will be many digital datasets available which can indeed legitimately
become part of an environmental database, effectively little more than a data catalogue,
but they will not be of much other use unless well documented, and potentially of little
real use in an analytical sense.
In the UK the National Geospatial Database Framework (NGDF) (AGI, 1996;
Watts, 1997) has been proposed as one way of securing the collection and archiving of
standardised geospatial datasets for more widespread and long-term use. Although little
has been said to date about marine and coastal datasets (the Ordnance Survey and the
UK Hydrographic Office did collaborate on the development of an experimental coastal
zone map series and are now collaborating in 2000/2001 with the British Geological
Survey (BGS) on a new digital initiative), it is clear that much stands to be gained by
formalising the collection and documentation of spatial datasets (both archival and new)
which will ultimately facilitate more correct, widespread and long term usage. The most
important issue though is to draw attention to the need to provide detailed
documentation on datasets that are available either free or at cost so that awareness of
the need to acquire and use quality data is brought to the attention of the GIS
practitioner.
References
AGI (1996). NGDF document.
AGI (1996). Guidelines for Geographic Information Content and Quality: For those
who use, hold, or need to acquire geographic information. AGI Data Quality
Working Group. AGI Publication No. 1/96. 69p.
Bartlett, D. (1994). GIS and the Coastal Zone: Past, Present and Future. I&E Committee
Publication. AGI Publication Number 3/94. 36p.
Bohnsack, J.A., and Sutherland, D.L. (1985). Artificial Reef Research: A Review with
Recommendations for Future Priorities. Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol.
37(l):11-39.
Bruno, M.S., Herrington, T.O., Rankin, K.L., and Ketteridge, K.E. (1996). Monitoring
Study of the Beachsaver Reef at Avalon, New Jersey, Technical Report SIT-
129
This chapter has set out to examine a typical environmental project based
around the use of existing datasets with the intention of highlighting some of the
possible areas in which there are potential pitfalls for the unwary. It is clear that there
are many, particularly for the applications specialist who relies, out of necessity, on
archival datasets.
The conclusions of this chapter are that providing the researcher is made aware
of and recognises the potential pitfalls and attempts to take account of them in the study,
limiting the study to legitimate uses of the data, as outlined, then the existing
geographical datasets can be useful. However, if no account is taken of the limitations
of the data, then it becomes very difficult to have any confidence in the outcome of any
data analysis that makes use of these datasets.
The fact that there are few guidelines provided for those collecting data, and
few if any incentives at present to collect data in a standardised form means that many
datasets, which are potentially very valuable and useful will continue to have limited
use outside of the project for which they were originally gathered and intended. This
means that there will be many digital datasets available which can indeed legitimately
become part of an environmental database, effectively little more than a data catalogue,
but they will not be of much other use unless well documented, and potentially of little
real use in an analytical sense.
In the UK the National Geospatial Database Framework (NGDF) (AGI, 1996;
Watts, 1997) has been proposed as one way of securing the collection and archiving of
standardised geospatial datasets for more widespread and long-term use. Although little
has been said to date about marine and coastal datasets (the Ordnance Survey and the
UK Hydrographic Office did collaborate on the development of an experimental coastal
zone map series and are now collaborating in 2000/2001 with the British Geological
Survey (BGS) on a new digital initiative), it is clear that much stands to be gained by
formalising the collection and documentation of spatial datasets (both archival and new)
which will ultimately facilitate more correct, widespread and long term usage. The most
important issue though is to draw attention to the need to provide detailed
documentation on datasets that are available either free or at cost so that awareness of
the need to acquire and use quality data is brought to the attention of the GIS
practitioner.
References
AGI (1996). NGDF document.
AGI (1996). Guidelines for Geographic Information Content and Quality: For those
who use, hold, or need to acquire geographic information. AGI Data Quality
Working Group. AGI Publication No. 1/96. 69p.
Bartlett, D. (1994). GIS and the Coastal Zone: Past, Present and Future. I&E Committee
Publication. AGI Publication Number 3/94. 36p.
Bohnsack, J.A., and Sutherland, D.L. (1985). Artificial Reef Research: A Review with
Recommendations for Future Priorities. Bulletin of Marine Science. Vol.
37(l):11-39.
Bruno, M.S., Herrington, T.O., Rankin, K.L., and Ketteridge, K.E. (1996). Monitoring
Study of the Beachsaver Reef at Avalon, New Jersey, Technical Report SIT-