Fremantle Port Inner Harbour and Channel ... - Fremantle Ports

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Project 1Project 1 aimed to generate a broad substrate classification (Tier 1 classification) to extractinformation based on the classes outlined in Table 2.Table 2: Tier 1 marine substrate mapping classesTier 1ClassesLightSubstrateDarkSubstrateOpen WaterTurbid WaterDescriptionIndicative of sandy substrates inshallow areasIndicative of biotic substrates andabiotic substrates such as Boulders,Rock, Pebbles, CobblesAll areas where water depthprevents the classification of the seafloorAll areas where suspended sedimentand plumes prevents theclassification of the sea floor.Limitations or assumptionsWater depth prevents classification beyond15mUncertainty of class with where water depthsare between 15-20m. Increased uncertaintywhere water depths are greater than 20m.Some variability can still be detected basedon context, field data integration, texture ofimagery.Areas deeper than 15m water depth wheresea-floor variability cannot be detecteddespite analysis of imagery context, textureand field data integration.Areas across the site where turbidity hasimpacted the imagery.Segmentation algorithms were tested and applied to separate objects of homogeneity based onstatistical relationships within the imagery. Classification algorithms were also trialled, but due tolimitations with water column depths, it was deemed necessary to export the statistical segments withonly the light substrate at depths shallower than 15m. All depths greater than 15m were required to bemanually classified based on the statistical objects and field data inputs.As part of the Tier 1 substrate mapping in Project 1, areas that could not be identified due to theexistence of turbidity plumes or at depths greater than 15 m were masked as either Turbid Water orOpen Water to distinguish regions that were not able to be processed further.Project 2Project 2 aimed to generate a more detailed substrate classification (Tier 2 classification) to extractinformation based on the classes outlined in Table 3. The segments exported in Project 1 were usedas a base to inform the manual attribution of shape context and texture in combination with field data.Specialists in Satellite Imagery and Geospatial Solutions | Commercial in confidence Page | 6
Table 3: Tier 2 marine substrate mapping classesTier 2ClassesSandRockSeagrassOpen WaterTurbid WaterDarkSubstrateDescriptionIndicative of sandy substrates inshallow areasIndicative of abiotic substrates suchas Boulders, Rock, Pebbles,Cobbles, which are dark in surfacecolourIndicative of biotic substrates whichare dominated by SeagrasscommunitiesAll areas where water depthprevents the classification of the seafloorAll areas where suspended sedimentand plumes prevents theclassification of the sea floor.Dark substrate from Tier 1classification was not able to beseparated into a Tier 2 classLimitations or assumptionsWater depth prevents classification beyond15mMay include sub-dominance of algae speciesor algae/rock mixUncertainty of class where water depths arebetween 15-20m. Increased uncertaintywhere water depths greater than 20m. Somevariability can still be detected based oncontext, field data integration, texture ofimagery.Areas deeper than 15m water depth wheresea-floor variability cannot be detecteddespite analysis of imagery context, textureand field data integration.Areas across the site where turbidity hasimpacted the imagery.Water depth has impeded identification ofsubstrate to Tier 2 level.Quality AssuranceThe output classification has been checked for inconsistencies in the classification and for errors ofomission and commission. Geoimage undertook a system of evaluations within the OBIA process,which included a degree of adjustment of the segmentation algorithms applied prior to export into theGIS environment.ResultsSupply of deliverables includes the raw archive digital imagery and sun glint reduced imagery inGeoTIFF format along with Project 1 and Project 2 Tier 1 and Tier 2 substrate classifications in ESRIShapefile format.Results of Tier 1 classes for Project 1 are mapped in Figure 2. Only Light Substrate, Dark Substrate,Open Water and Turbid Water could be identified for this Project. Figure 3 shows the results for theProject 2 Tier 2 mapping. For Project 2, Light Substrate was identified as Sand; Dark Substrate wasidentified as either indicative of Rock dominance or Seagrass dominance. Open Water and TurbidWater could not be further analysed in Project 2. One area within the Tier 2 classification could not befurther analysed due to water depth. Variability could be detected so that a change in substrate colourcould be assigned; however, the substrate composition of this area could not be identified beyond theTier 1 classification. Water depth was the constraining factor in this case.Specialists in Satellite Imagery and Geospatial Solutions | Commercial in confidence Page | 7
Page 1:
Fremantle Port Inner Harbour and Ch
Page 5 and 6:
Client: Fremantle PortsDocument his
Page 7 and 8:
ContentsExecutive Summary .........
Page 9 and 10:
Executive SummaryProject StatusFrem
Page 11 and 12:
1. Introduction1.1 Background and p
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 1.1Dredge areas, reclaimed a
Page 15 and 16:
Table 2.2 Audit tableAuditCode801:M
Page 17 and 18:
AuditCodeSubject Action How Evidenc
Page 19 and 20:
3. Annual Survey Footprint of Offsh
Page 21 and 22:
Figure 3.2 Differences in bathymetr
Page 23:
A one in five year storm event (as
Page 26 and 27:
5. SummaryThere were zero non-compl
Page 29:
6. ReferencesDEC (2009) Guidelines
Page 33 and 34:
STATUS OF THIS DOCUMENTThis documen
Page 35 and 36:
Report shall be 15 months from the
Page 37 and 38:
6-3 If the Water Quality Monitoring
Page 39:
Table 2: Summary of key proposal ch
Page 47:
Fremantle Ports1 Cliff StreetFREMAN
Page 51:
Fremantle Ports - Gage RoadsOffshor
Page 55:
Client: Fremantle PortsRevisions hi
Page 58 and 59:
Figure 1.1Figure 1.2Figure 1.3Figur
Page 61 and 62:
Executive SummaryOceanica Consultin
Page 63 and 64:
1. Introduction1.1 BackgroundThe Ga
Page 65 and 66:
Figure 1.2Gage Roads habitat map in
Page 67 and 68:
Figure 1.3Bathymetry for Gage Roads
Page 69 and 70:
Figure 1.4 Benthic habitat within G
Page 71 and 72: 2. Methods2.1 Benthic habitat surve
Page 73 and 74: 2.2 Seagrass recovery2.2.1 Permanen
Page 75 and 76: Table 2.1Seagrass sites, zone desig
Page 77 and 78: Table 2.3Limits of Reporting (LOR)
Page 79 and 80: Sediment nutrients and metalsNutrie
Page 81 and 82: 3. Results3.1 Benthic habitat mapA
Page 83 and 84: Figure 3.2 Benthic habitat post dis
Page 85 and 86: 3.2 Seagrass recovery3.2.1 Seagrass
Page 87 and 88: Table 3.4PERMANOVA table of results
Page 89 and 90: Table 3.7Data ranges and detection
Page 91 and 92: The bathymetry data for December 20
Page 93 and 94: Bathymetry data from December 2011
Page 95 and 96: 4. DiscussionWithin the Offshore Di
Page 97 and 98: 6. AcknowledgementsThis report was
Page 99: Appendix AGeo Oceans Report
Page 102 and 103: Benthic Habitat AssessmentTowed Vid
Page 104 and 105: 1. IntroductionGeo Oceans was commi
Page 106 and 107: Table 2 Tide predictions for the Po
Page 108 and 109: Figure 1 Substrate and biota habita
Page 110 and 111: Figure 2 Depth data collected durin
Page 112 and 113: Appendix 1: Video analysis biologic
Page 115: Appendix BGeoImage Report
Page 118 and 119: Table of ContentsIntroduction......
Page 120 and 121: Figure 1: Study site overview for s
Page 124 and 125: Figure 2: Tier 1 classification res
Page 126 and 127: Limitations and assumptionsA number
Page 129: Appendix CSeagrass Monitoring Site
Page 147: Appendix ESeagrass Shoot Count Data
Page 155: Appendix GSediment Field Log
Page 169: Appendix INutrient and Metals Data
Page 172 and 173:
MarineandFreshwaterResearchLaborato
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180:
show all

Fremantle Port Inner Harbour and Channel ... - Fremantle Ports

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?