UK Coastal and Marine Resource Atlas

1
UK Coastal and Marine Resource Atlas

  

• Coastal Atlases Workshop
• Cork Ireland July 25 26, 2006

2
Background

• Old paper atlas BP, NCC, MPCU
• Was primary ref tool for CP and response in UK
• Out of date misinformation
• Potential ve impact when used for
• CP e.g. OPRC plans
• Response - operational

3
Background - context

• MCA project leaders why?
• Responsible for the co-ordination of response to
  maritime pollution incidents

4
Purpose of the Atlas

• To provide a more flexible resource for national
  oil spill planning
• Not a substitute for live consultation with
  statutory bodies
• To provide generic information on sensitive
  resources of the UK coastline and its seas to
  all stakeholders
• To assist in id of protection and clean-up
  priorities
• To facilitate seamless multi agency response
• Consistency with the UK - NCP

5
Purpose of the Atlas to facilitate?

• Audit and planning consistent effective CPs
• Operational response urgent needs
• Clean-up management
• Damage assessment, compensation, responsibilities
• Wider sharing of data

6
Target Audience

• Government agencies env planning, esp oil spill
  planning and response
• Oil industry
• CP specialist consultants in coastal and marine
  env management public / private

7
Atlas Partners

• Maritime and Coastguard Agency
• Scottish Executive
• Department for Environment, Food and Rural
  Affairs
• Department of Trade and Industry
• English Nature
• Scottish Natural Heritage
• Joint Nature Conservation Committee
• Kent County Council
• Hampshire County Council
• Essex County Council
• Environment Agency, Anglian Region
• Energy Institute

Complex project management
8
MAGIC - platform

• Defra led
• Ideal host for the coastal and marine digital
  atlas
• Standard GIS tools to view and query data

9
What is MAGIC?

• Multi-Agency
• Partnership Project
• Geographic Information
• All data has spatial element
• for the Countryside
• All partners concerned with rural policy and
  services

10
Addition of the new datasets

• Originally England only
• Extending scope to include marine and Great
  Britain datasets
• First phase will be Coastal Marine Resource
  Atlas data
• NOT a Scottish or Welsh system

11
How is MAGIC delivered?

• Via the website
• www.magic.gov.uk
• Access information through
• Interactive map
• Data download facility
• Static Maps
• Accessible to all over the Internet

12
Technical Architecture

• Dedicated Internet server
• ESRI ArcIMS software
• Customised in-house to meet user requirements
• Data stored in SQL Server
• ESRI ArcSDE used to access data via ArcIMS

13
(No Transcript)
14

• Marine data available in ED50 Mercator and GB
  National Grid
• Metadata available
• Data Download
• Static Maps

15
The challenges?

• Data issues
• Marine environment completely new to MAGIC
• Aligning to current MAGIC procedures
• Continuing with MAGIC service during development

16
Datasets/layers

• Around 100 datasets
• Coastal Habitats
• GB Conservation Designations
• Infrastructure
• Species Data

17
Data layers
Data set Sub-data categories Data source
Terrestrial base mapping 150,000 raster mapping 125,000 raster mapping Ordnance Survey
Bathymetry 5m, 10m, 20m ( 1mile buffer), 40m UKHO (DEFRA)
Offshore jurisdictions 12 mile limit Marine Pollution Control Zone CEFAS MCA
Standing Orders for dispersant use DEFRA SEERAD
Infrastructure Windfarms Oil gas Shipping Lanes Crown Estate DEAL TBC
18
Data layers
Data set Sub-data categories Data source
Intertidal geology BGS, CCW
Coastal habitats Sandunes ( machair) EN, CCW, SNH
Cetaceans JNCC, SMRU, Seawatch Foundation
Seals Haul out pupping sites SMRU
Wildfowl waders WWT
Seabirds Seabird colonies Offshore concentrations JNCC
Sensitive fish areas Spawning grounds Nursery Areas CEFAS CEFAS
Fishfarms Crown Estate (Scotland)
Shellfish beds CEFAS, SEPA
Conservation designations EN, CCW, SNH
Bathing waters EA, SEPA
19
Example layer CCW Intertidal substrate
20
Problems

• Licensing issues OS, UKHO
• Poorly managed, inaccessible data
• Inconsistent records in single dataset
• Incomparable regional datasets
• Incomplete data coverage national
• Multiple datasets for same kind of data

21
Problems

• Inconsistent data collection and classification
• High spatial resolution for broadscale mapping
  purposes
• Doubts over dataset origins, quality, scale etc

22
Data management and QAMetadata

• MAGIC standards consistent approach
• Providers used standard MAGIC form
• Issues with varying standards of form completion
• Origin and quality sometimes lacking over
  reliance on personal knowledge

23
Data management and QAData Management Plan

• Clear procedural guide for maintaining datasets
• Flow charts/guides for
• Data request
• Data receipt
• QA procedures
• Data input and processing
• Final QA

24
Data update

• Monthly update procedure
• Will include entirely new datasets

25
Lessons learned

• Data provider organisations should ensure better
  consistency in data collection and managed
• Joined-up approach between devolved govt
  agencies
• Employ data management teams to avoid hoarding
  culture

26
Lessons learnt

• Data audits to identify
• gaps in information and quality
• Priorities for meeting operational and policy
  requirements
• Develop links between partner organisations esp
  to assist smaller organisations

27
www.magic.gov.uk

• Project final report and data management plan
  available
• Thank you for listening