
EUTRO_EDA_H_DICT |
||||||
Header/Field Name |
Description/Long Name |
Format |
Allow Nulls |
Definitions/Contents |
Units |
Codes (Y/N) |
| EDASUBEDA | 5-digit Watershed Code | Char 5 | N |
A code assigned to each derived spatial area (e.g., an EDA or CDA). Concatenated from the EDACDA attribute and SUBEDA attribute. | Y |
|
| SUB_NAME | Watershed Name | Char 55 | N |
For EDAs with component sub-major watershed drainages (subEDAs) defined (e.g., the Chesapeake Bay), a subEDA specific name. | N |
|
| POLY_CLAS | Spatial Type | Char 25 | N | Type of spatial area (EDA only) | N | |
| REGION | Region Code | Char 1 | N |
NOAA Coastal Assessment Region; (N = North Atlantic, M = Mid-Atlantic, S = South Atlantic, G = Gulf of Mexico, P = Pacific, L = Great Lakes, U = Interior, X = International) | Y |
|
| LANDE_AREA | Land EDA/CDA Area | Num 8 | Y |
Land EDA/CDA Area | square miles | N |
| WATRE_AREA | Water EDA/CDA Area | Num 8 | Y |
Water EDA/CDA Area | square miles | N |
| T_AREA_MI2 | Total Area (mi2) | Num 14,5 | N | Area of the entire EDA | square miles | N |
| ECONDITION | Overall Eutrophic Condition | Char 20 | Y | Aggregated qualitative value from all symptoms for entire estuary | N | |
| ECONDCONF | Overall Eutrophic Condition Confidence | Char 20 | Y | Level of confidence in assessment of Overall Eutrophic Condition | N | |
| CHLORO_A | Chlorophyll a (Primary Symptom) | Char 20 | Y | Aggregated qualitative value for entire estuary | N | |
| EPI_ABUND | Epiphyte Abundance (Primary Symptom) | Char 20 | Y | Aggregated qualitative value for entire estuary | N | |
| MACROABUND | Macroalgal Abundance (Primary Symptom) | Char 20 | Y | Aggregated qualitative value for entire estuary | N | |
| PRIM_SYMPT | Primary Symptoms Overall | Char 20 | Y | Aggregated qualitative value of chlorophyll a, epiphyte, and macroalgal for entire estuary | N | |
| LOW_DO | Low Dissolved Oxygen (Secondary Symptom) | Char 20 | Y | Aggregated qualitative value for entire estuary | N | |
| SAV_LOSS | Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Loss (Secondary Symptom) | Char 20 | Y | Aggregated qualitative value for entire estuary | N | |
| NUITOXBLM | Nuisance/Toxic Algal Blooms (Secondary Symptom) | Char 20 | Y | Aggregated qualitative value for entire estuary | N | |
| SEC_SYMPT | Secondary Symptoms Overall | Char 20 | Y | Aggregated qualitative value of low DO, SAV loss,and nuisance/toxic blooms for entire estuary | N | |
| HUMAN_INFL | Influencing Factor: Overall Human Influence | Char 20 | Y | Aggregated qualitative value of nutrient input and susceptibility for entire estuary | N | |
| HMNINFCONF | Influencing Factor: Human Influence Confidence | Char 20 | Y | Level of confidence in assessment of Overall Human Influence | N | |
| SUSCEPTIBL | Influencing Factor: Susceptibility | Char 20 | Y | Based on relative capacity of estuary to dilute and flush dissolved nutrient loads | N | |
| N_YIELD | Influencing Factor: Nitrogen Yield | Char 20 | Y | Estimates of total nitrogen yield from five major nutrient source types | N | |
| FUTOUTLOOK | Future Outlook | Char 20 | Y | Projected changes in eutrophic conditions through 2020 based on projected population growth and susceptibility | N | |
| FTOTLKCONF | Future Outlook Confidence | Char 20 | Y | Level of confidence in assessment of Future Outlook | N | |
| RECCOMFISH | Impaired Use: Recreational/Commercial Fishing | Char 20 | Y | Was Recreational/Commercial Fishing identified by experts as a resource impaired for human use due to eutrophication? | N | |
| FISHCONSUM | Impaired Use: Fish Consumption | Char 20 | Y | Was Fish Consumption identified by experts as a resource impaired for human use due to eutrophication? | N | |
| SHELLFISH | Impaired Use: Shellfish | Char 20 | Y | Was Shellfishing identified by experts as a resource impaired for human use due to eutrophication? | N | |
| SWIMMING | Impaired Use: Swimming | Char 20 | Y | Was Swimming identified by experts as a resource impaired for human use due to eutrophication? | N | |
| BOATING | Impaired Use: Boating | Char 20 | Y | Was Boating identified by experts as a resource impaired for human use due to eutrophication? | N | |
| AESTHETICS | Impaired Use: Aesthetics | Char 20 | Y | Was Aesthetics identified by experts as a resource impaired for human use due to eutrophication? | N | |
| TOURISM | Impaired Use: Tourism | Char 20 | Y | Was Tourism identified by experts as a resource impaired for human use due to eutrophication? | N | |
| SAVHABLOSS | Impaired Use: SAV/Habitat Loss | Char 20 | Y | Was SAV/Habitat Loss identified by experts as a resource impaired for human use due to eutrophication? | N | |
| ASSIMCAPAC | Impaired Use: Assimilative Capacity | Char 20 | Y | Was Assimilative Capacity identified by experts as a resource impaired for human use due to eutrophication? | N | |
| NUTREDIMPR | Would Nutrient Reductions Improve Conditions? | Char 20 | Y | Identifies whether nutrient reductions in the watershed would likely improve conditions | N | |
| WATSHFOCUS | Watershed Focus | Char 20 | Y | Identifies where nutrient reductions are most important (EDA, FDA, or entire watershed) | N | |
| WWTP | Wastewater Treatment Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Wastewater Treatment Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| COMBSEWOVR | Combined Sewer Overflow Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Combined Sewer Overflow Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| ONSITE | Onsite (septics, etc.) Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Onsite (septics, etc.) Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| INDUSTRY | Industry Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Industry Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| ANIMAL_OPS | Animal Operations Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Animal Operations Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| URBNRUNOFF | Urban Runoff Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Urban Runoff Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| AGRICULTR | Agriculture Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Agriculture Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| FOREST_ACT | Forest Activities Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Forest Activities Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| RNGLNDUSE | Rangeland Use Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Rangeland Use Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| ATMOSHERE | Atmoshere Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Atmoshere Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| AQUACULTR | Aquacculture Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Aquacculture Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
| OTHRMGMTCN | Other Management Concerns | Char 5 | Y | Were Other Management Concerns identified by experts as an important target to manage in order to reduce nutrients? | N | |
|
Revised
December 13, 2007
| Questions, Comments?
Contact
Us
| Privacy
Policy
| Report
Errors on this Page |
Disclaimer | Site Information | NOAAs National Ocean Service | National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce http://coastalgeospatial.noaa.gov/documentation/eutro/eutro_eda_h_dict.html |