Download full issue - PanamJAS

More documents

Recommendations

Info

288 L. J. S. TELES & C. H. SAITO conservation units. Accordingly, those areas that ranked in the low risk category on the three proximity maps would be classified as the areas as the lowest susceptible areas to contamination (low risk). These are the extremes of an orderly classificatory vector, where the intermediary classes are found. The complete criteria can be found on Table III and the width of the potential risk zones can be seen in Table IV. To identify the areas recommended for ship unballasting, the greatest water circulation speed at ebb tide on the way out of the TSB should be found. The velocity range chosen was the one higher than 0.5 m/s, on the map of water circulation speed at neap tide with normal winds (when circulation velocity is minimized). Also, the deepest areas were searched to provide the maximum height of water columns and thus the greatest potential for dilution of the contaminants: the regions chosen were those with a depth greater than 30 meters, which represents the greatest depth within the amplitude range of that locality. The final map of the areas recommended for ship unballasting was shown in Figure 3. Table III. Criteria adopted for the map of areas susceptible to contamination. Potential risk Criteria for classification Very high When the zones of greatest potential risk according to proximity (from 0 km to 3.81 km) overlaid each other on all three maps. High When two of the greatest potential risk zones according to proximity overlaid one another (from 0 km to 3.81 km). Medium Overlaying indicated one component in the range of 0 km to 3.81 km and two components in the range of 3.81 km to 7.61 km, or overlay showing the three components in the range of 3.81 km to 7.61 km. Low-Medium Overlay showing at least one component in the range of 3.81 km to 7.61 km. Low Overlay showing all components to be in the categories above 7.61 km. Table IV. The territorial extension of the susceptible areas to contamination in the study area. Classes of potential risk Within TSB (km 2 ) Outside TSB (km 2 ) Very high potential risk 295.80 0.00 High potential risk 418.60 162.40 Medium potential risk 268.50 362.10 Low-Medium potential risk 42.48 145.20 Low potential risk 0.00 954.90 Totals: 1,025.38 1,624.60 In reality, the selected area is composed of two contiguous regions (1 and 2), which were chosen individually, then ranked between them according to the risk they presented due to their proximity to the interior of the TSB. Area 1 totals 16.19 km 2 and Area 2 totals 15.20 km 2 . The two areas together total 31.39 km 2 . Area 2 is more recommended for unballasting than Area 1. The precise geographical localization is presented in Table V. Discussion The map of proximity to urban areas locates the cities surrounding the TSB, including Salvador and the other cities in the metropolitan region under its direct influence. The map of proximity to mangrove swamps points out the sensitive areas of what still remains under the protection of the Área de Proteção Ambiental da Baía de Todos os Santos (Environmental Protection Area of Todos os Santos bay). These preliminary pieces of information make it possible to identify potential risk areas, and in the case of the bay of Iguapé, these data could serve as the primary risk assessment tool for the Marine Extractivist Reserve of the Iguapé Bay (ExRes), in the districts of Maragojipe and Cachoeira. The map of proximity to nature conservation units was made based on the location of the state NCU (environmental protection areas of Abaeté, TSB, Joanes/Ipitanga, and Bacia do Cobre) — under the management of the CRA — and on the location of the ExRes, a federal NCU for sustainable use. The delimitation of the proximity zones surrounding the NCU, identifying those which represent potential risk of contamination to the coastal areas by ballast water, could provide valuable information for the preparation of the Pan-American Journal of Aquatic Sciences (2009), 4(3): 283-293
Identification of areas for unballasting by geoprocessing - case study in Todos os Santos Bay, Brazil 289 respective NCU management plan. This plan, despite being land-related, could help define “buffer zones,” including the contiguous marine portions therein, as areas regulated from the point of view of anthropic activities in order to minimize the impact on biodiversity within the NCU. Figure 3. Map showing the areas recommended for ship unballasting. Table V. The geographical localization of areas recommended for ship unballasting (UTM, SAD-69, zone 24). Geographical localization of Area 1 (UTM) Geographical localization of Area 2 (UTM) N X Y N X Y 1 546.765 8.562.945 1 545.416 8.555.092 2 547.255 8.564.481 2 546.094 8.554.606 3 548.679 8.566.627 3 547.661 8.553.866 4 549.253 8.567.763 4 547.598 8.554.288 5 549.318 8.568.121 5 547.492 8.554.688 6 549.017 8.568.590 6 547.515 8.555.256 7 548.966 8.568.398 7 547.282 8.555.615 8 548.408 8.568.313 8 546.965 8.556.100 9 548.253 8.568.217 9 546.945 8.556.605 10 548.157 8.568.582 10 547.009 8.556.921 11 547.926 8.569.215 11 547.243 8.557.300 12 548.381 8.569.905 12 547.519 8.557.510 13 548.326 8.570.671 13 547.561 8.557.826 14 548.476 8.571.640 14 547.985 8.557.846 15 546.765 8.562.945 15 548.303 8.557.614 16 545.416 8.555.092 Pan-American Journal of Aquatic Sciences (2009), 4(3): 283-293
Page 2 and 3: PAN-AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AQUATIC SCI
Page 4 and 5: Comportamento Predatório Ex situ d
Page 6 and 7: 252 M. M. BEN AMOR ET AL. 2006 by d
Page 8 and 9: 254 M. M. BEN AMOR ET AL. 2005. Tel
Page 10 and 11: 256 P. A. MEJIA-FALLA & A. F. NAVIA
Page 12 and 13: 258 P. A. MEJIA-FALLA & A. F. NAVIA
Page 14 and 15: 260 C. Q. ALBUQUERQUE ET AL. Jaureg
Page 16 and 17: 262 C. Q. ALBUQUERQUE ET AL. was fi
Page 18 and 19: 264 C. Q. ALBUQUERQUE ET AL. nature
Page 20 and 21: 266 C. Q. ALBUQUERQUE ET AL. Wash.
Page 22 and 23: 268 J. A. A. XAVIER & M. V. VOLCAN
Page 24 and 25: 270 J. A. A. XAVIER & M. V. VOLCAN
Page 26 and 27: 272 R. S. BENITEZ & Y. R. SUAREZ pr
Page 28 and 29: 274 R. S. BENITEZ & Y. R. SUAREZ na
Page 30 and 31: 276 R. S. BENITEZ & Y. R. SUAREZ qu
Page 32 and 33: 278 R. S. BENITEZ & Y. R. SUAREZ th
Page 34 and 35: 280 G. MARTINEZ ET AL. trawl were a
Page 36 and 37: 282 G. MARTINEZ ET AL. Bertini, G.,
Page 38 and 39: 284 L. J. S. TELES & C. H. SAITO In
Page 40 and 41: 286 L. J. S. TELES & C. H. SAITO ev
Page 44 and 45: 290 L. J. S. TELES & C. H. SAITO Sp
Page 46 and 47: 292 L. J. S. TELES & C. H. SAITO en
Page 48 and 49: Distribution of planktonic cladocer
Page 50 and 51: 296 A. R. GHIDINI ET AL. composed m
Page 52 and 53: 298 A. R. GHIDINI ET AL. months (
Page 54 and 55: 300 A. R. GHIDINI ET AL. Figure 4.
Page 56 and 57: 302 A. R. GHIDINI ET AL. many reser
Page 58 and 59: 304 A. R. GHIDINI ET AL. cladoceran
Page 60 and 61: First report of larval Spiroxys sp.
Page 62 and 63: 308 M. D. SANTOS ET AL. Results and
Page 64 and 65: 310 M. D. SANTOS ET AL. Imprensa Un
Page 66 and 67: The nuisance of medusae (Cnidaria,
Page 68 and 69: 314 R. M. N NAGATA ET AL. Despite i
Page 70 and 71: 316 R. M. NAGATA ET AL. fishermen r
Page 72 and 73: 318 R. M. NAGATA ET AL. medusae, th
Page 74 and 75: Pan-American Journal of Aquatic Sci
Page 76 and 77: 322 R. M. NAGATA ET AL. Large Scyph
Page 78 and 79: 324 R. M. NAGATA ET AL. Excluder fo
Page 80 and 81: Comportamento Predatório Ex situ d
Page 82 and 83: 328 G. X. SANTANA ET AL. mês. As p
Page 84 and 85: 330 G. X. SANTANA ET AL. 40 NÚMERO
Page 86 and 87: 332 G. X. SANTANA ET AL. Figura 5.
Page 88 and 89: 334 G. X. SANTANA ET AL. viridula.
Page 90 and 91: 336 G. X. SANTANA ET AL. única a t
Page 92 and 93:
338 G. X. SANTANA ET AL. crabs. Mar
Page 94 and 95:
340 A. S. SANCHEZ-ALFEREZ ET AL. An
Page 96 and 97:
342 A. S. SANCHEZ-ALFEREZ ET AL. pr
Page 98 and 99:
344 A. S. SANCHEZ-ALFEREZ ET AL. so
Page 100 and 101:
346 A. S. SANCHEZ-ALFEREZ ET AL. Re
Page 102 and 103:
348 C. F. HALUCH ET AL. 1980), e é
Page 104 and 105:
350 C. F. HALUCH ET AL. Tabela I. L
Page 106 and 107:
352 C. F. H HALUCH ET AL. Figura 2.
Page 108 and 109:
354 C. F. HALUCH ET AL. ontogênica
Page 110 and 111:
356 C. F. HALUCH ET AL. Brachyura (
Page 112 and 113:
358 F. O. ROQUE ET AL. falling into
Page 114 and 115:
360 F. O. ROQUE ET AL. Table II. Su
Page 116 and 117:
362 F. O. ROQUE ET AL. models and s
Page 118 and 119:
364 M. F. PIMENTEL ET AL. Introduct
Page 120 and 121:
366 M. F. PIMENTEL ET AL. A B 3.0 2
Page 122 and 123:
368 M. F. PIMENTEL ET AL. Nunes, B.
Page 124 and 125:
370 W. M. DE SANTANA ET AL. Arromba
Page 126 and 127:
Composição e abundância de ovos
Page 128 and 129:
374 M. D. P. COSTA & J. M. SOUZA-CO
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Pan-American Journal of Aquatic Sci
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
II C. S. FERREIRA ET AL. world. Alo
Page 140 and 141:
Pan-American Journal of Aquatic Sci
Page 142:
VI C. S. FERREIRA ET AL. the millio
show all

Download full issue - PanamJAS

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

Delete template?

Save as template?