5f0db430-7f4d-42c3-afd4-c3f736b4fbd8 English dataset NatureScot (HQ Inverness) data_supply@nature.scot pointOfContact 2025-06-11 MEDIN 3.1.2 EPSG Geodetic Parameter Registry 2021-01-06 revision WGS 84 2002 Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary joint broad-scale mapping survey 2004-01-01 publication GB-SCT-SNH-ME-000076-MRSNH01100000013-TAY Marine Recorder NS-000076 NatureScot project ID The Firth of Tay and the Eden Estuary are situated on the east coast of Scotland between Carnoustie in the north and St Andrews in the south and the site has been selected as a candidate Special Area of Conservation (cSAC). The qualifying features include estuaries, mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide, sandbanks which are slightly covered by seawater all the time and common seals Phoca vitulina. It is also an important site for overwintering wildfowl and waders. In order that a comprehensive management plan can be developed to ensure the sustainable use of resources within the marine cSAC it is essential to obtain an understanding of the geographic distribution and extent of the habitats of interest. A comprehensive biotope mapping survey of the intertidal and subtidal habitats was undertaken in the summer of 2002, by a collaborative research group comprising staff from the University of St Andrews, Heriot-Watt University and SNH. Mapping of the intertidal was accomplished principally through the employment of QuickBird satellite imagery, ground truthed with data collected in intertidal field survey (at a subset of locations samples were collected for sediment infauna and granulometric analysis). Subtidal areas of the site were surveyed by rapid broad scale acoustic techniques, ground truthed with data collected in the field using ROV, epifaunal samples by naturalists dredge and infaunal samples collected by both pipe and Van Veen grab; subsamples retained for granulometric analysis. Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), Headquaters Data Manager 01463 725000 data_supply@nature.scot owner NatureScot (HQ Inverness) NatureScot Data Manager data_supply@nature.scot custodian Colin Moore Colin Moore Consultant c.g.moore84@gmail.com originator Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), Headquaters Data Manager 01463 725000 data_supply@nature.scot originator Esther Hughes Data Archive for Seabed Species and Habitats (DASSH) Data Manager 01752 633102 dassh.enquiries@mba.ac.uk distributor notPlanned Marine Environmental Data and Information Network MEDIN metadata record availability 2025-06-11 revision Habitats and biotopes Species distribution GEMET - INSPIRE themes, version 1.0 2021-09-28 revision Habitat characterisation Habitat extent Zoobenthos taxonomic abundance Zoobenthos taxonomy-related counts SeaDataNet Parameter Discovery Vocabulary 2021-09-28 revision otherRestrictions no restrictions to public access otherRestrictions Not for navigational use; SNH copyright data which is available for re-use under government licence terms: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/ 12 English 8-bit variable size UCS Transfer Format, based on ISO/IEC 10646 biota environment oceans -3.3439636230469 -2.6408386230469 56.307586484736 56.526358834698 SeaVox salt and freshwater body gazetteer 2021-01-06 creation North Sea Charting Progress 2 Sea Areas 2021-01-06 creation Northern North Sea 2002-06-25 2002-12-25 SeaVoX Vertical Co-ordinate Coverages 2021-01-06 revision circalittoral SeaVoX Vertical Co-ordinate Coverages 2021-01-06 revision infralittoral SeaVoX Vertical Co-ordinate Coverages 2021-01-06 revision littoral Bates, C. R., Moore, C. G., Malthus, T., Mair, J. M. and Karpouzli, E. (2004). Broad scale mapping of habitats in the Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary, Scotland. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 007 (ROAME No. F01AA401D). Database Marine Recorder Documents Published report Image various dataset Commission Regulation (EU) No 1089/2010 of 23 November 2010 implementing Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards interoperability of spatial data sets and services 2010-12-08 publication Bathymetric sidescan and single beam sonar remote acoustic mapping techniques were utilised at near 100% coverage to develop acoustically classed seafloor maps of the Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary cSAC where water depths were greater than 3m. For shallow areas and intertidal areas airborne and satellite techniques were used to develop classed maps. High fidelity ground validation data were collected in the field using drop-video, ROV, grab, dredge and hand sampling methodologies to enable the subsequent interpretation of the acoustic maps. Before using any survey technology for either mapping or object identification an appreciation of the system capabilities is needed. A key element is the system resolution or fidelity with which the system can identify objects on the sea floor. The system resolution will dictate the size of object that is recognisable at a particular distance from the survey instrument. The majority of instruments have both theoretical resolution limits and manufacturer defined values from testing under ideal conditions. Unfortunately, these are rarely achieved in real surveys. Achieving a particular resolution will depend on the precision to which the instrument can measure electronic signatures, however, it is the precision with which each measurement of the sea floor is made with a particular instrument that is of real interest to the user. A discussion of an instrument in terms of the accuracy of object identification on the bottom can be misleading as this is a function of not only the sonar instrument specifications but also of all the navigation errors, the location errors for the instrument, the acoustic noise that is recorded and most importantly the identification or interpretation logic. Accuracy in interpretation requires consistent groundtruth information and reliable positioning of both the acoustic data and groundtruth data. The theoretical resolution for each survey instrument is briefly given followed by a discussion of the use of the instrument in SAC habitat mapping (see Bates, et al. 2004). Further compound errors are also discussed: mapping error, groundtruth position, track spacing, AGDS, bathymetric sidescan, Spatial mapping of acoustics in the GIS. Satellite imagery: Orders were placed for QuickBird image acquisition over the Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary cSAC in April 2002. Due to the size of the estuary and the comparatively narrow swath of the satellite, the acquisition was required in three parts (Figure 3.12). The acquisition was further affected by the need for acquisition during periods of low tide to ensure intertidal regions were exposed, and thus to obtain as complete a mapping as possible. This requirement restricted the acquisition ‘window’ for any of the three parts to two periods per month of approximately 5 days each. Relatively cloudy weather throughout the summer of 2002, coincident with the narrow acquisition windows, meant that only Part 1 of the Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary cSAC was captured, on 27.08.02. The acquisition characteristics of the image are given in Table 3.6 (see Bates, et al. 2004). This part comprises the eastern-most portion of the cSAC extending down the coast from Carnoustie to St Andrews (Figure 3.13). The image acquired was virtually cloud free. Visual inspection of the data revealed few radiometric problems or other flaws such as missing scan lines etc. This dataset was used in all subsequent processing. The Quickbird imagery was supplied in geocorrected form to a 1:50,000 scale accuracy by DigitalGlobe Inc. To further improve the accuracy for mapping purposes, the imagery was subsequently geocorrected to the corresponding OS LandLine (1:1250 scale) map base using ground control points (GCP's). The ultimate correction of these data is thus to within one pixel (less than 2.6 m) of true position. The projection used was the Transverse Mercator British National Grid. Qualitative comparison of our secondary geocorrected image with that of the original image supplied by DigitalGlobe indicated that the original data supplied were accurate only to within 3-4 pixels (approximately 8-12m) of the true location. It may be felt that the level of accuracy of the data originally supplied is of acceptable accuracy to work with, without the need for further geocorrection. Although it is unknown what system or map-base DigitalGlobe use for their original corrections, it is likely that this level of accuracy would be similar for any images obtained from this sensor around the Scottish coastline.