Hawaii's Coastal Use Mapping Project
•Transferir como PPT, PDF•
1 gostou•947 visualizações
Hawaii Coastal mapping project.
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Destaque
Destaque (20)
Semelhante a Hawaii's Coastal Use Mapping Project
Semelhante a Hawaii's Coastal Use Mapping Project (20)
Mais de Hawaii Geographic Information Coordinating Council
Mais de Hawaii Geographic Information Coordinating Council (20)
Último
Último (20)
Hawaii's Coastal Use Mapping Project
- 1. Using Participatory Mapping to Inform Coral Reef Management Arielle Levine Regional Social Scientist, contractor to NOAA PIRO Assistant Professor, San Diego State University Arielle.Levine@noaa.gov Emma Anders Planner, Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources Emma.Anders@hawaii.gov
- 2. Coral reef management social science priorities Via the Social Science Strategy, 2010-15 CRCP Hawaii was moving towards site-based management and the designation of priority sites The need for information regarding coastal human uses was identified. What are people doing? Where? Impacts Reliance on coastal resources Project Origins
- 4. Participatory Mapping “Gathering and mapping spatial information to help communities learn, discuss, build consensus, and make decisions about their communities and associated resources.” • Pre-existing spatial information on human activities is limited • Detailed knowledge lies with the resource users • Local stakeholders create the data, and contribute to local engagement and acceptance of outcomes Useful in a context where:
- 5. Mapping Project Goals Spatial distribution of human use Intensity of human uses in different locations Overlap of different uses Seasonal elements of activities Potential use impacts and/or conflicts Other aspects of human coastal and watershed activities Develop data and tools to better visualize and understand: Types of human activities taking place within the region
- 6. Coastal Use Mapping Process: Participatory GIS • GIS facilitates participatory mapping -Digital base layers are available to facilitate computer-based mapping -Knowledgeable and identifiable local users participate in mapping activities • Involve community and resource users in documenting information, create the maps themselves • Improve community awareness of marine activities and data products
- 7. Coastal Use Mapping Process: Participatory GIS • GIS facilitates participatory mapping -Digital base layers are available to facilitate computer-based mapping -Knowledgeable and identifiable local users participate in mapping activities • Involve community and resource users in documenting information, create the maps themselves • Improve community awareness of marine activities and data products
- 8. Data Synthesis Tools & Products Data Collection • Draft Use List • Develop Basemap • Identify/recruit experts and stakeholders • Facilitate workshops • Collect spatial data • Compile GIS data • Review workshop notes • Build maps & metadata • Seek feedback & revise • Create maps & visualization tools • Compile project report • Build web products
- 9. Coastal Uses Mapped - Hawaii NON-EXTRACTIVE: Commercial diving and snorkeling Commercial boating and mammal watching Thrill craft and high speed activities Recreational diving and snorkeling Surfing Camping Non-motorized, non-commercial boating Swimming EXTRACTIVE: Free diving and scuba-based harvesting Pole and line fishing from shore Pole and line fishing from boat Aquarium collecting Bait netting Throw nets Net fishing from boat Net fishing from shore or nearshore Shoreline and nearshore gleaning and gathering
- 10. PGIS - Process and Technology Screen Participants Facilitator GIS Analysts
- 11. General Use Area : Areas where the use is known to occur with some regularity regardless of its frequency or intensity. Does not include areas where the use may occur once or twice or might occur in the future. Dominant Use Areas: Areas routinely used by most users most of the time (within the seasonal use pattern for the activity). Dominant use areas must be drawn within the general use footprint. Supplemental Use Information: Relevant spatial and non-spatial information about each use (seasonal patterns, events relating to the activity, day vs. night, etc.). Much of this information is shown in the map books.
- 12. Workshop Participation Hawaii – 48 participants, 3 days, 6 break-out groups Maui – 47 participants, 3 days, 5 break-out groups • local residents • fishermen • recreational specialists • agency representatives • cultural practitioners • resource stewards • enforcement officers Recruitment based on having significant, locally recognized, regional expertise in at least one of the types of coastal uses
- 13. Tools & Products • Draft Use List • Develop Basemap • Identify/recruit experts and stakeholders • Facilitate workshops • Collect spatial data • Compile GIS data • Review workshop notes • Build maps & metadata • Seek feedback & revise • Create maps & visualization tools • Compile project report • Build web products Data Collection Data Synthesis
- 14. • Removed land areas • Cleaned drawing artifacts • Extended and trimmed areas based on participant notes e.g. to the 150ft isobath • Overlay 100m hexagon grid • Thresholding - 50% or more break-out groups must have agreed on dominant use areas
- 15. Local Stakeholder Feedback Meetings -Accuracies -Inaccuracies -Expansion/contraction of use footprint -Seasonality -Use notes Obtain feedback from workshop participants and other stakeholders regarding:
- 16. Data Synthesis Tools & Products • Draft Use List • Develop Basemap • Identify/recruit experts and stakeholders • Facilitate workshops • Collect spatial data • Compile GIS data • Review workshop notes • Build maps & metadata • Seek feedback & revise • Create maps & visualization tools • Compile project report • Build web products Data Collection
- 17. Project Outcomes • Data • Mapbooks • Web Maps hawaiicoralreefstrategy.com
- 18. How has this project informed coral reef management in Hawai’i? Spatial data on human use patterns is available to resource managers to inform spatial planning in priority sites New, previously unavailable information Some indirect use in priority site planning (SKCAP, West Maui WMP) Do we need to do spatial planning for these particular sites? Answer is probably not – this is very important for us to know Less conflict than we anticipated
- 19. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT = most useful outcome Management-neutral topic was a good entry point for stakeholders Hands-on participatory research empowers the stakeholders Focus on people and place, not impacts How has this project informed management?
- 20. Project Sponsors and Collaborators Primary funding from: NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program (CRCP) HI Fisheries Local Action Strategy NOAA Collaborators: Pacific Islands Regional Office Pacific Services Center MPA Center Hollings Marine Lab Local Partners Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) The Nature Conservancy
- 21. Contacts for more information: Arielle Levine arielle.levine@noaa.gov Emma Anders emma.anders@hawaii.gov
Notas do Editor
- My name is Christine Feinholz, and I’m going to present the Hawaii Coastal Uses data that are available for North Kona and West Maui. I’m a former contractor to NOAA, and I was trained in this work during the Kona workshops, and I was the technical lead for the Maui workshops. Arielle is still involved with this project, but couldn’t be here today to present the data so I’m doing that on her behalf.
- So the way this project got started was originally out of discussions with coral reef managers in the US Pacific Jurisdictions. We were developing the Social Science Strategy for NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation program for 2010-2015, and as part of that we did interviews with managers in US Coral Reef Jurisdictions to determine what their local needs were in terms of social science information (to help us determine our priorities and how we could best support local needs). As the regions (particularly Hawaii) were moving more towards site-based management, designating priority sites for management actions, there was a need for more social science information regarding these sites. Many of the sites had biological monitoring, but most lacked information regarding the human uses of the area. Before management decisions could be made, there was need to determine what exactly were people doing, where, and what did this mean both for people and for coral reef resources. So there was a demand for greater understanding of local interactions with, and reliance on, marine resources.
- The Hawaii Coral Program, specifically, had just gone through a process to designate two priority sites to focus their resources for targeted conservation action, starting in 2010 (rather than spreading it thinly across the entire MHI). To address this need for information (and to provide a baseline for monitoring in the future), we worked with local managers to propose a project to map significant human uses of the coastal and nearshore environment, focusing on the two priority sites: Kawaihae – Keahole (on the Big Island), and Honolua – Wahikuli (in Maui).
- Now, knowledge regarding human uses and activities in the region did exist – but it was the dispersed knowledge of the many local stakeholders who lived in and used these areas regularly. So to obtain information, we used a technique known as “participatory mapping.” Participatory mapping is particularly useful in a context such as we were working in, where: Pre-existing spatial information on human activities is limited Detailed knowledge lies with the resource users themselves And through engaging local resource users and local stakeholders, you can create data on the spatial distribution of human activities. The added benefit of this technique is that it also can contribute to local engagement, and increase local buy-in regarding the validity of the maps that are created (since local resource users created them themselves).
- The goals of the project were to address these information needs and to develop data and tools to better visualize and understand… Now because there were few data sources regarding human uses of the areas, this prosed a bit of a challenge.
- The specific mapping technique we used is called participatory GIS. This allows us to use computer technology to facilitate digital mapping in a context like we had in Hawaii, where data was limited, but information lay with local residents and resource users. Participatory GIS is a tool that facilitates the involvement of community and resource users in documenting information, and because they are involved in creating that information, that improves their awareness of marine activities and the available data products once they are created. It also improves community buy-in regarding the accuracy of the data, since local resource users were directly involved in creating the maps and checking their validity.
- The specific mapping technique we used is called participatory GIS. This allows us to use computer technology to facilitate digital mapping in a context like we had in Hawaii, where data was limited, but information lay with local residents and resource users. Participatory GIS is a tool that facilitates the involvement of community and resource users in documenting information, and because they are involved in creating that information, that improves their awareness of marine activities and the available data products once they are created. It also improves community buy-in regarding the accuracy of the data, since local resource users were directly involved in creating the maps and checking their validity.
- I will quickly explain the process that we used for participatory mapping of these sites. The first step is deciding what kind of uses should be mapped for each site – this we do through meetings and obtaining detailed feedback from local stakeholders. We gathered any existing base-layers we could find that might be relevant to human use mapping in the region, so that these will be available during the mapping process as well as the data processing phase (so if people reference bathymetry, mooring buoys, or coastal access points, we can bring them up as reference). We then go through a painstaking recruitment process to make sure that we have the appropriate participants there during the mapping workshop. With any mapping, the maps you create are only as good as the data you collect to create them, and with participatory mapping, the data you collect is only as good as the people you get in the room to provide the data, so this is a very important component of the process. Once we have recruited local experts in the activities that we are mapping, we facilitate mapping workshops where we collect the data.
- Just as an example – this list shows the variety of activities we mapped in Maui, which were relevant to what is taking place in the nearshore waters at that priority site – a total of 17 different uses. We had a similar list for Hawaii – there is significant overlap in these lists, but they are not identical since the types of uses taking place in these two locations were not identical.
- The technology and layout of the mapping process are illustrated here. We loaded base maps into a GIS computer to project on a screen, and we used both a digital whiteboard and digital tablet that participants could mark on using a digital pen. Participants sat in a semi-circle in their break-out groups, and a group facilitator helped to explain the mapping process and make sure group consensus was reached on the maps that were drawn. We also had a GIS specialist to run the equipment, and note-takers to take both technical notes and other notes that came out of the discussion for each use. Participants were asked to draw spatial boundaries for where each of the uses took place in the region, and this spatial information was saved directly into the computer in digital form for processing later.
- Participants were asked to map 3 levels of use. First they were asked to map the general use footprint, which we defined as General Use Footprint : Areas where the use is known to occur with some regularity regardless of its frequency or intensity. Next they were asked to map dominant use areas, defined as: Areas routinely used by most users most of the time, within the seasonal use patterns for that activity. We also collected Supplemental Use Information, which is Relevant spatial and non-spatial information about each use (seasonal patterns, specific events relating to the activity, day vs. night activity, etc.).
- We had a total of 48 participants in the Hawaii project and 47 in the Maui project, each over the course of 3 days in multiple break-out groups. As I mentioned before, we made sure to have participants who had significant local expertise in each of the categories we were mapping – so we had participants from a wide variety of categories, from local residents, to fishermen, recreation specialists, agency reps, cultural practitioners, and many others…
- I will quickly explain the process that we used for participatory mapping of these sites. The first step is deciding what kind of uses should be mapped for each site – this we do through meetings and obtaining detailed feedback from local stakeholders. We gathered any existing base-layers we could find that might be relevant to human use mapping in the region, so that these will be available during the mapping process as well as the data processing phase (so if people reference bathymetry, mooring buoys, or coastal access points, we can bring them up as reference). We then go through a painstaking recruitment process to make sure that we have the appropriate participants there during the mapping workshop. With any mapping, the maps you create are only as good as the data you collect to create them, and with participatory mapping, the data you collect is only as good as the people you get in the room to provide the data, so this is a very important component of the process. Once we have recruited local experts in the activities that we are mapping, we facilitate mapping workshops where we collect the data.
- QUICK RUNDOWN OF POST PROCESSING PIC 1 & 2 We start out with the overlapping polygons that were drawn by the different groups for each use (in this example I’m showing the footprint for recreational diving and snorkeling – which was mapped by all 5 break-out groups – the yellow shows general use here, and the red shows the dominant use footprint). You can see it looks a bit messy because we have data from every group, and we haven’t edited any of the drawn polygons according to the notes. Next we cleaned polygons, clipping layers to the land and project boundaries and extended and trimmed polygons based on the notes collected during the workshop. This creates the general use footprint, which includes all data from all groups. In this example, one group mapped this use as occurring out to 150 ft. depth. PIC 3 We then overlay the data with a grid of 100m diameter hexagons - ideal for showing data along a curvy coastlines. PIC 3 & 4 For the dominant use footprint, we did what we call “thresholding” the data. We counted the number of times a hexagon was mapped by a group for that use. For example, where you see the darkest reddish color, that means that all 5 of the break out groups identified that area as a Dominant Use Area for Recreational Diving and Snorkeling. We then removed all the hexagons that were not mapped by 50% or more of the groups – which results in the map you see here, which shows the dominant use footprint for recreational diving and snorkeling.
- After processing the data, we go back to present draft results to the workshop participants and other community members to get their feedback, answer any questions that may have come up in data processing, and get final community sign-off on the maps. We make final revisions based on these meetings…
- I will quickly explain the process that we used for participatory mapping of these sites. The first step is deciding what kind of uses should be mapped for each site – this we do through meetings and obtaining detailed feedback from local stakeholders. We gathered any existing base-layers we could find that might be relevant to human use mapping in the region, so that these will be available during the mapping process as well as the data processing phase (so if people reference bathymetry, mooring buoys, or coastal access points, we can bring them up as reference). We then go through a painstaking recruitment process to make sure that we have the appropriate participants there during the mapping workshop. With any mapping, the maps you create are only as good as the data you collect to create them, and with participatory mapping, the data you collect is only as good as the people you get in the room to provide the data, so this is a very important component of the process. Once we have recruited local experts in the activities that we are mapping, we facilitate mapping workshops where we collect the data.
- So the data products from the workshop are now available to managers and user groups to inform management planning, as well as provide baseline information on human use patterns to potentially track changes in human use activities over time. We have made it available in multiple forms to be used by a variety of stakeholder groups, including GIS data, PDF maps book with maps of each use for each area as well as qualitative descriptions of the use, and online interactive viewers. You can access all of these data products through the Hawaii coral reef strategy website
- So now I’m going to turn it over to Emma to talk a bit about how the project has informed management in Hawaii, and some of the lessons learned there…
- Anyway, those are just a few final thoughts, and before I end I need to pay tribute to our sponsors and many collaborators. One of the strengths of this project was the large number of partnerships we developed in order to make it happen, both within NOAA and with local partners on the ground in our different locations. Funding for all of these projects was primarily through NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation Program, and HI’s Fisheries Local Action Strategy also contributed significant resources to the HI work.
- If you’d like more information about any of these projects, here is contact information for each location, as well as the website addresses where you can look at data products.
- With this in mind, we had conceived of this project as something that we could extend to provide information to all of the US Coral Reef Jurisdictions if desired, so I would welcome your additional sites or programs where this kind of mapping process could be helpful. And with that, I think you for your attention, and open it up to questions.