Biodiversity study of Southern Biscayne Bay and Card Sound 1968-1973

A multi-disciplinary investigation was conducted in southern Biscayne Bay and Card Sound from 1968 to 1973. The purpose of the investigation was to conduct an integrated study of the ecology of southern Biscayne Bay with special emphasis on the effects of the heated effluent from the Turkey Point fossil fuel power plant, and to predict the impact of additional effluent from the planned conversion of the plant to nuclear fuel. The results of this investigation have been discussed in numerous publications. This report contains the unpublished biology data that resulted from the investigation. (PDF contains 44 pages)

An environmental assessment of the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park and the Key Largo Coral Reef Marine Sanctuary (Unpublished 1983 Report)

The Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park was established in 1960 and the Key Largo National Marine Sanctuary in 1975. Field studies, funded by NOAA, were conducted in 1980 - 1981 to determine the state of the coral reefs and surrounding areas in relation to changing environmental conditions and resource management that had occurred over the intervening years. Ten reef sites within the Sanctuary and seven shallow grass and hardbottom sites within the Park were chosen for qualitative and quantitative studies. At each site, three parallel transects not less than 400 m long were run perpendicular to the reef or shore, each 300 m apart. Observations, data collecting and sampling were done by two teams of divers. Approximately 75 percent of the bottom within the 18-m isobath was covered by marine grasses, predominantly turtle grass. The general health of the seagrasses appeared good but a few areas showed signs of stress. The inner hardbottom of the Park was studied at the two entrances to Largo Sound. Though at the time of the study the North Channel hardbottom was subjected to only moderate boat traffic, marked changes had taken place over the past years, the most obvious of which was the loss of the extensive beds of Sargassum weed, one of the most extensive beds of this alga in the Keys. Only at this site was the green alga Enteromorpha encountered. This alga, often considered a pollution indicator, may denote the effects of shore run off. The hardbottom at South Channel and the surrounding grass beds showed signs of stress. This area bears the heaviest boat traffic within the Park waters causing continuous turbidity from boat wakes with resulting siltation. The offshore hardbottom and rubble areas in the Sanctuary appeared to be in good health and showed no visible indications of deterioration. Damage by boat groundings and anchors was negligible in the areas surveyed. The outer reefs in general appear to be healthy. Corals have a surprising resiliency to detrimental factors and, when conditions again become favorable, recover quickly from even severe damage. It is, therefore, a cause for concern that Grecian Rocks, which sits somewhat inshore of the outer reef line, has yet to recover from die-off in 1978. The slow recovery, if occurring, may be due to the lower quality of the inshore waters. The patch reefs, more adapted to inshore waters, do not show obvious stress signs, at least those surveyed in this study. It is apparent that water quality was changing in the keys. Water clarity over much of the reef tract was observed to be much reduced from former years and undoubtedly plays an important part in the stresses seen today over the Sanctuary and Park. (PDF contains 119 pages)

Resource survey of Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary, 1983

Forward: Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary (LKNMS) was designated in 1981 to protect and promote the study, teaching, and wise use of the resources of Looe Key Sanctuary (Plate A). In order to wisely manage this valuable resource, a quantitative resource inventory was funded by the Sanctuary Programs Division (SPD), Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in cooperation with the Southeast Fisheries Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA; the Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies (CIMAS), University of Miami; the Fisher Island Laboratory, United States Geological Survey; and the St. Petersburg Laboratory, State of Florida Department of Natural Resources. This report is the result of this cooperative effort. The objective of this study was to quantitatively inventory selected resources of LKNMS in order to allow future monitoring of changes in the Sanctuary as a result of human or natural processes. This study, referred to as Phase I, gives a brief summary of past and present uses of the Sanctuary (Chapter 2); and describes general habitat types (Chapter 3), geology and sediment distribution (Chapter 4), coral abundance and distribution (Chapter 5), the growth history of the coral Montastraea annularis (Chapter 6), reef fish abundance and distribution (Chapter 7), and status of selected resources (Chapter 8). An interpretation of the results of the survey are provided for management consideration (Chapter 9). The results are expected to provide fundamental information for applied management, natural history interpretation, and scientific research. Numerous photographs and illustrations were used to supplement the report to make the material presented easier to comprehend (Plate B). We anticipate the information provided will be used by managers, naturalists, and the general public in addition to scientists. Unless otherwise indicated, all photographs were taken at Looe Key Reef by Dr. James A. Bohnsack. The top photograph in Plate 7.8 was taken by Michael C. Schmale. Illustrations were done by Jack Javech, NMFS. Field work was initiated in May 1983 and completed for the most part by October 1983 thanks to the cooperation of numerous people and organizations. In addition to the participating agencies and organizations we thank the Newfound Harbor Marine Institute and the Division of Parks and Recreation, State of Florida Department of Natural Resources for their logistical support. Special thanks goes to Billy Causey, the Sanctuary Manager, for his help, information, and comments. We thank in alphabetical order: Scott Bannerot, Margie Bastian, Bill Becker, Barbara Bohnsack, Grant Beardsley, John Halas, Raymond Hixon, Irene Hooper, Eric Lindblad, and Mike Schmale. We dedicate this effort to the memory of Ray Hixon who participated in the study and who loved Looe Key. (PDF contains 43 pages)

Impact of the commercial fishery on the population of bait shrimp (Penaeus spp.) in Biscayne Bay, 1986

Monthly population size of bait shrimp in the Bay was estimated from December 1984 to July 1985. Growth rates for male and female P. duorarum showed that pink shrimp exhibit a mean residence time in the nursery area (Biscayne Bay) of approximately 21 weeks. Monthly mortality rates were determined for each sex of pink shrimp. It was estimated that 23% and 26% of the male and female monthly population size, respectively, was absorbed by both the fishery and ecosystem monthly. Monthly proportion of the standing stock expected to die exclusively through fishing was 6.5% and 6.0% for males and females respectively. Estimates of emigration rates showed that approximately 4.0% of the population was lost from the Bay system each month. This surplus production was about 50% of the average monthly catch by the fleet. Fishing mortality represents only 8 - 9% of the losses to the shrimp population. The biggest source of loss is emigration, suggesting that most shrimp beyond the size at recruitment (to the fishery) are not utilized for food while in the Bay. Thus, it appears that the direct impact of the fishery on the bait shrimp population is relatively small. (PDF contains 46 pages)

The ecological basis of fishery yield of the Puerto Rico-Virgin Islands Insular Shelf: 1987 Assessment

A literature review was conducted to locate information on the flow of energy from primary producers to the fishery stocks of the Puerto Rican-Virgin Islands insular shelf. This report uses site-specific information to describe the major ecological subsystems, or habitats, of the region, to identify the more common species and the subsystems in which they occur, to quantify productivity and biomass, and to outline trophic relationships. Discussions on each topic and subsystem vary in substance and detail, being limited by the availability and accessibility of information. (PDF contains 189 pages) Seven distinct subsystems are described: mangrove estuary, seagrass bed, coral reef, algal plain, sand/mud bottom, shelf break, and overlying pelagic. Over 50 tables provide lists of species found in each habitat on various surveys dating back to 1956. Estimates of density, relative abundance, and productivity are provided when possible. We evaluated whether sufficient information exists to support an analysis of the energy basis of fishery production in the area, beginning with the design and development of an ecosystem model. Data needs in three categories - species lists, biomass, and trophic relations - were examined for each subsystem and for each of three species groups - primary producers, invertebrates, and fish. We concluded that adequate data, sufficient for modeling purposes, are available in 16 (25%) of 64 categories; limited data, those requiring greater extrapolation, are available in 35 (55%) categories; and no data are available in 13 (20%) categories. The best-studied subsystems are seagrass beds and coral reefs, with at least limited data in all categories. Invertebrates, the intermediate link in the food web between primary producers and fishes, are the least quantified group in the region. Primary production and fishes, however, are relatively well-studied, providing sufficient data to support an ecosystem-level analysis and to initiate a modeling effort.

Benthic sampling program in Biscayne Bay, 1981-1982

The Biscayne Bay Benthic Sampling Program was divided into two phases. In Phase I, sixty sampling stations were established in Biscayne Bay (including Dumfoundling Bay and Card Sound) representing diverse habitats. The stations were visited in the wet season (late fall of 1981) and in the dry season (midwinter of 1982). At each station certain abiotic conditions were measured or estimated. These included depth, sources of freshwater inflow and pollution, bottom characteristics, current direction and speed, surface and bottom temperature, salinity and dissolved oxygen, and water clarity was estimated with a secchi disk. Seagrass blades and macroalgae were counted in a 0.1-m2 grid placed so as to best represent the bottom community within a 50-foot radius. Underwater 35-mm photographs were made of the bottom using flash apparatus. Benthic samples were collected using a petite Ponar dredge. These samples were washed through a 5-mm mesh screen, fixed in formalin in the field, and later sorted and identified by experts to a pre-agreed taxonomic level. During the wet season sampling period, a nonquantitative one-meter wide trawl was made of the epibenthic community. These samples were also washed, fixed, sorted and identified. During the dry season sampling period, sediment cores were collected at each station not located on bare rock. These cores were analyzed for sediment size and organic composition by personnel of the University of Miami. Data resulting from the sampling were entered into a computer. These data were subjected to cluster analyses, Shannon-Weaver diversity analysis, multiple regression analysis of variance and covariance, and factor analysis. In Phase II of the program, fifteen stations were selected from among the sixty of Phase I. These stations were sampled quarterly. At each quarter, five Petite Ponar dredge samples were collected from each station. As in Phase I, observations and measurements, including seagrass blade counts, were made at each station. In Phase II, polychaete specimens collected were given to a separate contractor for analysis to the species level. These analyses included mean, standard deviation, coefficient of dispersion, percent of total, and numeric rank for each organism in each station as well as number of species, Shannon-Weaver taxa diversity, and dominance (the compliment of Simpson's Index) for each station. Multiple regression analysis of variance and covariance, and factor analysis were applied to the data to determine effect of abiotic factors measured at each station. (PDF contains 96 pages)

A comparison of animal abundance and distribution in similar habitats in Rookery Bay, Marco Island and Fakahatchee on the southwest coast of Florida, 1971 - 1972

The three areas in Rookery Bay, near Marco Island and Fakahatchee Bay were sampled from July 1971 through July 1972, and 1,006,640 individual animals were collected, of which the majority (55%) came from the Marco area. The large disparity between the catches at Marco and the remaining study areas was due mainly to the appearance of high numbers of species of polychaetes and echinoderms that were of very minor importance or absent from the catches in Rookery Bay and Fakahatchee Bay. When only the major classes of animals in the catch are considered (i.e., crustaceans, fish and mollusks) the total counts for Fakahatchee (298,830) and Marco (275,075) are quite comparable but both exceed Rookery Bay (119,388) by a considerable margin. The effects of the red tide outbreak in the summer of 1971 were apparently restricted to the Rookery Bay Sanctuary and may account for some of the observed differences. For the purposes of making controlled comparisons between the study areas, three common habitats were selected in each area so that a mud bottom habitat, a sand-shell bottom habitat and a vegetated bottom habitat were located in each of the study areas. Total catches by habitat types for crustaceans, fish and mollusks and certain of the more abundant species show clearly the overwhelming importance of the vegetated bottom as a habitat for animals. By habitat the vegetated areas had the most "indicator species" with five, the mud habitat was next with three and the sand-shell habitat third with two. Thus the vegetated habitat would be the best choice if a single habitat were to be used to detect environmental changes between study areas. (PDF contains 137 pages)

Spatial distribution of Chlorpyrifos and Endosulfan in USA coastal waters and the Great Lakes

Between 1994 and 1997, 258 tissue and 178 sediment samples were analyzed for chlorpyrifos throughout the coastal United States and the Great Lakes. Subsequently, 95 of the 1997 tissue samples were reanalyzed for endosulfan. Tissue chlorpyrifos concentrations, which exceeded the 90th percentile, were found in coastal regions known to have high agricultural use rates but also strongly correlated with sites near high population. The highest concentrations of endosulfans in contrast, were generally limited to agricultural regions of the country. Detections of chlorpyrifos at several Alaskan sites suggest an atmospheric transport mechanism. Many Great Lakes sites had chlorpyrifos tissue concentrations above the 90th percentile which decreased with increasing distance from the Corn Belt region (Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin) where most agriculturally applied chlorpyrifos is used. Correlation analysis suggests that fluvial discharge is the primary transport pathway on the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico coasts for chlorpyrifos but not necessarily for endosulfans. (PDF contains 28 pages)

Techniques for spatial analysis and visualization of benthic mapping data: final report

The mapping and geospatial analysis of benthic environments are multidisciplinary tasks that have become more accessible in recent years because of advances in technology and cost reductions in survey systems. The complex relationships that exist among physical, biological, and chemical seafloor components require advanced, integrated analysis techniques to enable scientists and others to visualize patterns and, in so doing, allow inferences to be made about benthic processes. Effective mapping, analysis, and visualization of marine habitats are particularly important because the subtidal seafloor environment is not readily viewed directly by eye. Research in benthic environments relies heavily, therefore, on remote sensing techniques to collect effective data. Because many benthic scientists are not mapping professionals, they may not adequately consider the links between data collection, data analysis, and data visualization. Projects often start with clear goals, but may be hampered by the technical details and skills required for maintaining data quality through the entire process from collection through analysis and presentation. The lack of technical understanding of the entire data handling process can represent a significant impediment to success. While many benthic mapping efforts have detailed their methodology as it relates to the overall scientific goals of a project, only a few published papers and reports focus on the analysis and visualization components (Paton et al. 1997, Weihe et al. 1999, Basu and Saxena 1999, Bruce et al. 1997). In particular, the benthic mapping literature often briefly describes data collection and analysis methods, but fails to provide sufficiently detailed explanation of particular analysis techniques or display methodologies so that others can employ them. In general, such techniques are in large part guided by the data acquisition methods, which can include both aerial and water-based remote sensing methods to map the seafloor without physical disturbance, as well as physical sampling methodologies (e.g., grab or core sampling). The terms benthic mapping and benthic habitat mapping are often used synonymously to describe seafloor mapping conducted for the purpose of benthic habitat identification. There is a subtle yet important difference, however, between general benthic mapping and benthic habitat mapping. The distinction is important because it dictates the sequential analysis and visualization techniques that are employed following data collection. In this paper general seafloor mapping for identification of regional geologic features and morphology is defined as benthic mapping. Benthic habitat mapping incorporates the regional scale geologic information but also includes higher resolution surveys and analysis of biological communities to identify the biological habitats. In addition, this paper adopts the definition of habitats established by Kostylev et al. (2001) as a “spatially defined area where the physical, chemical, and biological environment is distinctly different from the surrounding environment.” (PDF contains 31 pages)

Coral Remote Sensing Workshop: Proceedings and Recommendations, 17-18 September, Sheraton, Brickell Ave, Miami FL

Coral reefs exist in warm, clear, and relatively shallow marine waters worldwide. These complex assemblages of marine organisms are unique, in that they support highly diverse, luxuriant, and essentially self-sustaining ecosystems in otherwise nutrient-poor and unproductive waters. Coral reefs are highly valued for their great beauty and for their contribution to marine productivity. Coral reefs are favorite destinations for recreational diving and snorkeling, as well as commercial and recreational fishing activities. The Florida Keys reef tract draws an estimated 2 million tourists each year, contributing nearly $800 million to the economy. However, these reef systems represent a very delicate ecological balance, and can be easily damaged and degraded by direct or indirect human contact. Indirect impacts from human activity occurs in a number of different forms, including runoff of sediments, nutrients, and other pollutants associated with forest harvesting, agricultural practices, urbanization, coastal construction, and industrial activities. Direct impacts occur through overfishing and other destructive fishing practices, mining of corals, and overuse of many reef areas, including damage from souvenir collection, boat anchoring, and diver contact. In order to protect and manage coral reefs within U.S. territorial waters, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce has been directed to establish and maintain a system of national marine sanctuaries and reserves, and to monitor the condition of corals and other marine organisms within these areas. To help carry out this mandate the NOAA Coastal Services Center convened a workshop in September, 1996, to identify current and emerging sensor technologies, including satellite, airborne, and underwater systems with potential application for detecting and monitoring corals. For reef systems occurring within depths of 10 meters or less (Figure 1), mapping location and monitoring the condition of corals can be accomplished through use of aerial photography combined with diver surveys. However, corals can exist in depths greater than 90 meters (Figure 2), well below the limits of traditional optical imaging systems such as aerial or surface photography or videography. Although specialized scuba systems can allow diving to these depths, the thousands of square kilometers included within these management areas make diver surveys for deeper coral monitoring impractical. For these reasons, NOAA is investigating satellite and airborne sensor systems, as well as technologies which can facilitate the location, mapping, and monitoring of corals in deeper waters. The following systems were discussed as having potential application for detecting, mapping, and assessing the condition of corals. However, no single system is capable of accomplishing all three of these objectives under all depths and conditions within which corals exist. Systems were evaluated for their capabilities, including advantages and disadvantages, relative to their ability to detect and discriminate corals under a variety of conditions. (PDF contains 55 pages)

Magnitude and extent of sediment toxicity in selected estuaries of South Carolina and Georgia

Toxic chemicals can enter the marine environment through numerous routes: stormwater runoff, industrial point source discharges, municipal wastewater discharges, atmospheric deposition, accidental spills, illegal dumping, pesticide applications and agricultural practices. Once they enter a receiving system, toxicants often become bound to suspended particles and increase in density sufficiently to sink to the bottom. Sediments are one of the major repositories of contaminants in aquatic envronments. Furthermore, if they become sufficiently contaminated sediments can act as sources of toxicants to important biota. Sediment quality data are direct indicators of the health of coastal aquatic habitats. Sediment quality investigations conducted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and others have indicated that toxic chemicals are found in the sediments and biota of some estuaries in South Carolina and Georgia (NOAA, 1992). This report documents the toxicity of sediments collected within five selected estuaries: Savannah River, Winyah Bay, Charleston Harbor, St. Simons Sound, and Leadenwah Creek (Figure 1). (PDF contains 292 pages)

An assessment of two decades of contaminant monitoring in the Nation’s Coastal Zone.

Executive Summary: Information found in this report covers the years 1986 through 2005. Mussel Watch began monitoring a suite of trace metals and organic contaminants such as DDT, PCBs and PAHs. Through time additional chemicals were added, and today approximately 140 analytes are monitored. The Mussel Watch Program is the longest running estuarine and coastal pollutant monitoring effort conducted in the United States that is national in scope each year. Hundreds of scientific journal articles and technical reports based on Mussel Watch data have been written; however, this report is the first that presents local, regional and national findings across all years in a Quick Reference format, suitable for use by policy makers, scientists, resource managers and the general public. Pollution often starts at the local scale where high concentrations point to a specific source of contamination, yet some contaminants such as PCBs are atmospherically transported across regional and national scales, resulting in contamination far from their origin. Findings presented here showed few national trends for trace metals and decreasing trends for most organic contaminants; however, a wide variety of trends, both increasing and decreasing, emerge at regional and local levels. For most organic contaminants, trends have resulted from state and federal regulation. The highest concentrations for both metal and organic contaminants are found near urban and industrial areas. In addition to monitoring throughout the nation’s coastal shores and Great Lakes, Mussel Watch samples are stored in a specimen bank so that trends can be determined retrospectively for new and emerging contaminants of concern. For example, there is heightened awareness of a group of flame retardants that are finding their way into the marine environment. These compounds, known as polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), are now being studied using historic samples from the specimen bank and current samples to determine their spatial distribution. We will continue to use this kind of investigation to assess new contaminant threats. We hope you find this document to be valuable, and that you continue to look towards the Mussel Watch Program for information on the condition of your coastal waters. (PDF contains 118 pages)

Visual impact assessment of small dock & piers: Theory and practice

From a manager’s perspective, oftentimes the publicly held concerns related to small docks and piers are not really related to the environment. They may be more related to visual impacts and aesthetic concerns, a sense of over-development of the shore, or simply change. While individuals may hold personal aesthetic values related to small docks in general or an individual structure in particular, techniques have evolved that appear to provide reproducible, predictive assessments of the visual impacts and aesthetic values of an area and how those might change with development, including an increase in numbers of small docks. These assessments may be used to develop regulatory or non-regulatory methods for the management of small docks based on state or community standards. Visual impact assessments are increasingly used in the regulatory review of proposed development—although this process is still in its infancy as regards small docks and piers. Some political jurisdictions have established visual impact or aesthetic standards as relate to docks and others are in the process of investigating how to go about such an effort. (PDF contains 42 pages)

Knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of management strategies and regulations of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary by commercial fishers, dive operators, and environmental group members: A baseline characterization and 10-year comparison

This research is part of the Socioeconomic Research & Monitoring Program for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS), which was initiated in 1998. In 1995-96, a baseline study on the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of proposed FKNMS management strategies and regulations of commercial fishers, dive operators and on selected environmental group members was conducted by researchers at the University of Florida and the University of Miami’s Rosenstiel School of Atmospheric and Marine Science (RSMAS). The baseline study was funded by the U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program, and components of the study were published by Florida Sea Grant and in several peer reviewed journals. The study was accepted into the Socioeconomic Research & Monitoring Program at a workshop to design the program in 1998, and workshop participants recommended that the study be replicated every ten years. The 10-year replication was conducted in 2004-05 (commercial fishers) 2006 (dive operators) and 2007 (environmental group members) by the same researchers at RSMAS, while the University of Florida researchers were replaced by Thomas J. Murray & Associates, Inc., which conducted the commercial fishing panels in the FKNMS. The 10-year replication study was funded by NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation Program. The study not only makes 10-year comparisons in the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of FKNMS management strategies and regulations, but it also establishes new baselines for future monitoring efforts. Things change, and following the principles of “adaptive management”, management has responded with changes in the management plan strategies and regulations. Some of the management strategies and regulations that were being proposed at the time of the baseline 1995-96 study were changed before the management plan and regulations went into effect in July 1997. This was especially true for the main focus of the study which was the various types of marine zones in the draft and final zoning action plan. Some of the zones proposed were changed significantly and subsequently new zones have been created. This study includes 10-year comparisons of socioeconomic/demographic profiles of each user group; sources and usefulness of information; knowledge of purposes of FKNMS zones; perceived beneficiaries of the FKNMS zones; views on FKNMS processes to develop management strategies and regulations; views on FKNMS zone outcomes; views on FKNMS performance; and general support for FKNMS. In addition to new baseline information on FKNMS zones, new baseline information was developed for spatial use, investment and costs-and-earnings for commercial fishers and dive operators, and views on resource conditions for all three user groups. Statistical tests were done to detect significant changes in both the distribution of responses to questions and changes in mean scores for items replicated over the 10-year period. (PDF has 143 pages.)

Comments on hydrographic and topographic LIDAR acquisition and merging with multibeam sounding data acquired in the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary

In April 2005, a SHOALS 1000T LIDAR system was used as an efficient alternative for safely acquiring data to describe the existing conditions of nearshore bathymetry and the intertidal zone over an approximately 40.7 km2 (11.8 nm2) portion of hazardous coastline within the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (OCNMS). Data were logged from 1,593 km (860 nm) of track lines in just over 21 hours of flight time. Several islands and offshore rocks were also surveyed, and over 24,000 geo-referenced digital still photos were captured to assist with data cleaning and QA/QC. The 1 kHz bathymetry laser obtained a maximum water depth of 22.2 meters. Floating kelp beds, breaking surf lines and turbid water were all challenges to the survey. Although sea state was favorable for this time of the year, recent heavy rainfall and a persistent low-lying layer of fog reduced acquisition productivity. The existence of a completed VDatum model covering this same geographic region permitted the LIDAR data to be vertically transformed and merged with existing shallow water multibeam data and referenced to the mean lower low water (MLLW) tidal datum. Analysis of a multibeam bathymetry-LIDAR difference surface containing over 44,000 samples indicated surface deviations from –24.3 to 8.48 meters, with a mean difference of –0.967 meters, and standard deviation of 1.762 meters. Errors in data cleaning and false detections due to interference from surf, kelp, and turbidity likely account for the larger surface separations, while the remaining general surface difference trend could partially be attributed to a more dense data set, and shoal-biased cleaning, binning and gridding associated with the multibeam data for maintaining conservative least depths important for charting dangers to navigation. (PDF contains 27 pages.)