Questions presented to small group for response:

1. How do we establish specifications for Baseline Mapping Data for mapping of large areas?
2. How do we balance data density vs. costs?
3. Within the BMD mapping, how do we allow for areas needing additional or higher resolution data that may be required to meet the needs of some program(s)?
4. Can this be most cost-effectively accomplished by temporary changes to the routine mapping, or by separate mapping efforts?

M5 Small Group Work:

What comprises a baseline map? ("sea floor" characterization)

1. Bathymetry- depth/geomorphology
2. Substrate
• Surface sediments
• Sub surface control
3. Living Resources
• Benthic-sessile-species
4. Shoreline mapping (upland vs. wetland)
5. Cultural, archeological (wrecks, etc.)
6. Ground truth!

1. Specifications
• Driven by user needs (resolution)
• Ground truth
• Repeatability
• QA/QC
• Spatial accuracy (vertical and horizontal)
• Classification (accuracy)
• Regional vs. site specific
• Cost- adhere to regulations/statutes
2. Data Density vs. Cost- *what data are needed to define the problem*
• Project life cycle- realistic expectations
• Resolution required based on project (management) needs
• Data type to answer question- management/research
• Evaluate methods
• Study logistics- mobilization, production rates, location of site, etc.)
• Additional data at no additional cost
• COST SHARING
3. Higher resolution in specific areas
4. Regional overview (lay of the land)
• Site specific (high resolution detailed study)
5. Agency (user) coordination
• Cost sharing
• Commonalities
6. Changes to routine mapping to accommodate high resolution needs
• Anomalies
• Try to build into existing program (cannot be a "project buster")
• If not feasible-initiate another/secondary program
• Maintain flexibility
• Survey design, operation, etc.
• Site specific falls under "ground truth"
• Routine mapping is most cost effective
• Dependent on temporal variability
• Biomass movement, geology

M5: Baseline Mapping Data plenary comments following small group report:

1. No such thing as getting additional data at no additional cost; maybe "minimal" cost but not no cost
2. No one brought up there are a lot of projects ongoing across the state at different scales; we need to decide statewide what needs to be done for entire state; need consistency in what is done and shared with everyone
3. Working definition of baseline working sets
4. Data density vs. costs: frequently defined by different entities; budget may not give you what you need, comes down to lobbying for why/what you need
5. should be most cost effective data at what minimum level of data is driving it
6. Cost effective is not necessarily "cheap"
7. Reps of agencies need to make a case for why they have their needs; don’t be limited by current budgets for defining needs
8. National Spatial Data has very land based bias; we need to look at negative elevation; wedge in our needs; land cover should include benthic, that is bottom land cover; content standards