USF Libraries

A remote sensing comparison of the Mississippi Sound Barrier Island Complex, 1987 versus 1991

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
A remote sensing comparison of the Mississippi Sound Barrier Island Complex, 1987 versus 1991
Physical Description:
vi, 145 leaves : ill. (some col.) ; 29 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
Leary, Timothy John.
Publisher:
University of South Florida
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Florida
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Coast changes -- Mississippi Sound   ( lcsh )
Barrier islands -- Mississippi   ( lcsh )
Coast changes -- Remote sensing   ( lcsh )
Dissertations, Academic -- Marine science -- Masters -- USF   ( fts )

Notes

General Note:
1 photograph on 1 folded leaf. Thesis (M.S.)--University of South Florida, 1993. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 80-90).

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida
Holding Location:
Universtity of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 029674472
oclc - 30351454
usfldc doi - F51-00104
usfldc handle - f51.104
System ID:
SFS0040054:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

A REMOTE SENSING COMPARISON OF THE MISSISSIPPI SOUND BARRIER ISLAND COMPLEX: 1987 VERSUS 1991 BY TIMOTHY JOHN LEARY A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Department of Marine Science University of South Florida June 1993 Major Professor: Larry J. Doyle, Ph D.

PAGE 2

Graduate School University of South Florida St. Petersburg, Florida CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL Master's Thesis This is to certify that the Master's Thesis of TIMOTHY J. LEARY with a major in Marine Science has been approved by the Examining Committee on April16, 1993 as satisfactory for the thesis requirements for the Master of Science degree Examining Committee: Member: Ritftard L. Miller, 'Ph.D. --Member: D. Membe{ RicharrP./ Ph.D.

PAGE 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank several organizations and numerous individuals for their assistance in the execution and completion of this project. First, I would like to thank the USGS Center for Coastal Geology for providing the data and a major portion of the funding for my research Similar thanks are extended to the Univer s ity of South Florida's, Department of Marine Science, the Center for Nearshore Marine Science and the Florida Department of Natural Resources for providing the balance of the funding anc the facilities which enabled me to remain here and finish this research. Special thanks go to Dr. David Naar and Dr. Richard Stumpf who served as committee members and provided invaluable assistance in the design and editing of this thesis, Dr. Larry Doyle who provided support as my major professor, and Dr. Richard Miller for his generosity and patience because without him the methods for this research would not have been developed. Finally, I'd like to thank my parents, Jeannine and Fredric, and my wife, Kelly, for their endless ecouragement and support.

PAGE 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES iii LIST OF FIGURES iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS v ABSTRACT vi 1 Description of Study Area 2 Geologic Setting 2 Physical Setting 19 PREVIOUS STUDIES 24 REMOTE SENSING SYSTEMS 32 METHODS 38 Digital Imagery 38 Pre-processing 40 Processing 42 Data Rectification 43 Data Registration 46 Radiometric Corre c tion 48 Identification of Change 52 Removal of the Systematic Bias 53 Uncertainty 56 RESULTS 58 Dauphin Island, Alabama 59 Petit Bois Island, Mississippi 59 Hom Island, Mississippi 62 Ship Island, Mississippi 64 Cat Island, Mississippi 67 DISCUSSION 70 CONCLUSIONS 78 LIST OF REFERENCES 80 APPENDICIES App e ndix A : Monthly and Annual Wind Direction and Intensity f o r 91 the Central Gulf Coast Appendix B: Spectral Response Curves for the CAMS Sensor 105 ii

PAGE 5

Appendix B: Spectral Response Curves for the CAMS Sensor 105 Appendix C: Flow Charts Outlining the ELAS Processing Methods and 115 the Modules Employed Appendix D: Outline of the SPOT Satellite Imagery Processing Levels 121 Appendix E: Ground Control Points used to Georeference the SPOT 123 Satellite Imagery Appendix F: Description, Location, and Tide Guage Data Collected from 129 Stations in Mississippi Sound

PAGE 6

LIST OFT ABLES Table Title Page 1 Percentage of the Principal Clay Minerals and Carbon Constituents 9 in the Bottom Sediments of Mississippi Sound and Mobile Bay. 2 Results from the Previous Quantitative Studies of Shoreline Change 31 for the Barrier Islands of Mississippi Sound 3 Characteristics of the Remote Sensing Systems. 37 4 Weather Conditions During Data Collection 42 5 Summary of the Registration Parameters by Island 47 6 SPOT Calibration Values by Sensor by Waveband (g(A.)). 49 7 Normalized Extraterrestrial Solar Irradiance (Eo) Values for the 50 SPOT Sensors. 8 CAMS Calibration Values by Waveband. 50 9 Normalized Extraterrestrial Solar Irradiance (Eo) Values for the 51 CAMS Sensor. 10 Principles of Mathematical Change Mapping. 52 11 Tidal Heights measured from Mean Low Water (MLR) During 53 Data Acquisition 12 Shoreline Change and Systematic Bias Calculated for Each Island Due to the Differential Tidal Height. 54 13 Area of Exposed Land and the Net Change Calculations for the Islands of the Mississippi Sound Barrier Island Complex. 55 14 Maximum Uncertainty of the Area Calculations for Each Island. 57 15 Rates of Change Along Selected margins of the Islands of the Mississippi Sound Barrier Island Complex. 66 16 Net Overall Change to the Barrier Islands of Mississippi Sound 73

PAGE 7

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title Page 1 Location of the Study Area. 3 2 Geologic Map of Mississippi. 5 3 Geologic Cross-sections of Coastal Mississippi. 7 4 Surface Sediment Map of Mississippi Sound 10 5 Geology and Active Processes of Petit Bois Island, Mississippi. 11 6 Geology and Active Processes of Horn Island Mississippi. 12 7 Geology and Active Processes of Ship Island, Mississippi. 13 8 Geology and Active Processes of Cat Island Mississippi. 14 9 Cat Island, Mississippi. r6 10 Bathymetry of Mississippi Sound and Adjacent Nearshore Areas 18 11 Precipitation and Temperature Distribution for Coastal Mississippi 20 12 Percentage Frequency of Surface Wind Direction for the Central Gulf Coast 21 13 Current Patterns within the Study Area. 22 14 Historic Change of Petit Bois and Horn Islands, Mississippi. 25 15 Historic Change of Ship and Cat Islands, Mississippi. 26 16 Historic Change of the Mississippi Sound Barrier Islands 28 17 Historic Change of Petit Bois and Horn Islands, Mississippi. 29 18 Historic Change of Ship and Cat Islands, Mississippi. 30 19 SPOT Spectral Responce Curves (A) and Data Acquisition (B) 33 20 Schematic of the Satellite Scanner Geometry. 34 21 Schematic of the Airborne Scanner Geometry 36 22 Spatial Coverage of the SPOT Imagery 39 IV

PAGE 8

23 Spatial Coverage of the 8,500 Scanlines from the 10 m CAMS 41 Imagery. 24 Change Image for the Western Terminus of Dauphin Island, 60 Alabama 25 Change Image for Petit Bois Island, Mississippi. 61 26 Change Image for Hom Island, Mississippi. 63 27 Change Image for Ship Island, Mississippi. 65 28 Change Image for Cat Island, Mississippi. 68 29 Photograph of West Ship Island showing the Subaqueous Sedimentary Features. 71 30 Photograph Illustrating the Subaqueous Sedimentary Features Along the Margins of Cat Island, Mississippi. 76

PAGE 9

B P. CaC03 CAMS DN ELAS GIS ha HRV HT IAOV IE IFOV IL INCE INCL LE LL NAD NDVI NOAA NOS T-sheet RMS SPOT TM TOC UTM USGS w WID XOF YOF LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS Before Present Calcium Carbonate Calibrated Airborne Multispectral Sensor digital number NASA's Earth Resources Laboratory Application Software Geographical Information System hectare (1 ha = 2.47 acres) Haute Resolution Visible height Instantaneous Area of View initial element Instantaneous Field of View ini tialline element increment line increment last element last line North American Datum Normalized Differential Vegetative Index National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration US Coast and Geodetic Survey Topographic map root mean-square Systeme Probatoire d'Observation de la Terre Thematic Mapper Total Organic Carqon Universe Transverse Mercator United States Geological Survey integer value of a pixel in the Albedo Image width offset in the X-direction offset in the Y -direction v

PAGE 10

A REMOTE SENSING COMPARISON OF 1HE MISSISSIPPI SOUND BARRIER ISLAND COMPLEX: 1987 VERSUS 1991 BY TIM01HYJOHNLEARY An Abstract of a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science D e partment of Marine S c ience University of South Florida June 1993 Major Professor : Larry J Doyle, Ph.D. vi

PAGE 11

High resolution multispectral digital images were obtained to quantify changes in coastal morphology of the Mississippi Sound Barrier Island Complex. This study is unique because it approaches remote sensing change detection over a short period of time (4 years) during which no hurricanes occurred and because the imagery data are from different sensors Two multispectral SPOT satellite images (20m) collected on November 6, 1987 were compared to 10m Calibrated Airborne Multispectral Scanner (CAMS) imagery acquired on November 1, 1991. Despite the differences in the spatial resolution and spectral characteristics of these data, a processing methodology was developed that effectively quantified changes in shoreline position and island area. Digital base maps were created from a given data set by removing the known geometric distortions and remapping to a UTM Zone 16 map projection. Data from the comparison image were geometrically corrected then registered to these basemaps. Once registered, the digital numbers from each data set were calibrated to Albedo and used to mathematically identify the land/water interface by masking the water. A pixel by pixel subtraction of the masked 1987 SPOT data from the masked 1991 CAMS data facilitated the identification of change. The systematic bias that resulted from the differential tidal stage was removed. The greatest change in both island area and displacement were recorded for the small islands immediately west of Petit Bois Island. These islands migrated toward the Sound at an average rate of 23.36 3 07 m yrl and suffered a net loss of 6.37% (1.54 hectares). Due to the differences in the size of the islands studied, a loss of 40.39 hectares from Hom Island was less than one half of the loss posted for these islands (-3 00%). A net gain in island area was recorded for Cat, East Ship, and Petit Bois Islands, while losses were posted for West Ship, Hom, and the small Islands. Dauphin Island, Alabama also increased in size, however the coverage was limited to the western terminus.

PAGE 12

The magnitude of the changes that were identified at the termini of the islands were significant to offset the uncertainty of the methods. These changes were used in conjunction with the subaqueous sedimentary features identified in the green wavebands (0.50-0.60 microns) of the imagery to identify regional trends and infer the active sediment transport processes. Unfortunately, all of the areal changes calculated for this four year period fell within the uncertainty of the methods. Abstract Approved: ___ /. Major Professor: Larry J(D.J>{ le Professor, Departmen t--of.,Marine Science Date of Approval:

PAGE 13

1 INTRODUCTION The quantification of shoreline change to barrier islands, coastal marshes, and coastal beaches is an integral component of coastal planning and management. Traditional methods of in situ sampling do not provide sufficient data. to resolve the temporal and spatial scales of the processes that affect these areas Barrier island change has been monitored using beach profiling, aerial photographic analyses, and historical map evaluations. Beach profiling is costly and labor-intensive because large numbers of profiles are required over long reaches of the shoreline (Dolan et al., 1982). Aerial photography provides good resolution coverage over limited areas, however, to evaluate change over larger areas multiple photographs must be rectified, registered, and compiled into complex mosaics In contrast, historical maps provide coverage over large areas, but the information contained in the maps is limited to a cartographic representation. Recent advances in remote sensing imagery, however, provide a more cost-effective, accurate and reliable database McGarry (1987) used LANDSAT Thematic Mapper (TM) data. to map and quantify the shoreline changes of Pinellas County, Aorida following the 1985 hurricane season. Similarly, other investigators (see for example, Emplaincourt et al 1974; Sapp, 1975; Sapp et al., 1975; Hardin et al., 1976; Price, 1977; Hardin, 1978; Smith, 1989) have used various remote sensing systems to identify changes in coastal geomorphology and water quality along the coasts of Mississippi and Alabama. These studies utilized sensor-specific data. to map changes that occurred over long periods of time, or changes that were associated with the passage of a hurricane The design of this project was based upon the hypothesis that significant changes will take place along the sedimentary interface of the Mississippi Sound Barrier Island System in response to processes spanning seasonal time intervals, and that these processes will cause the land/water interface of the barrier islands to change on the order of tens of meters. The primary purpose of this study was to determine if remotely sensed

PAGE 14

2 data collected from different spectral sensors, and with different spatial resolutions, can be used effectively to investigate short-term changes in the geomorphology of barrier islands. This study is unique because it approaches remote sensing change detection over a short time period (4 years) during which no hurricanes occurred, and because the sensors used have never been quantitatively compared. Description of Study Area Mississippi Sound is an elongate body of marine to brackish water bounded on the north by the mainland coasts of Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana and separated from the open Gulf of Mexico to the south by Isle Au Pitre, the remnants of the St Bernard sub-delta of the Mississippi River, and a series of barrier islands (Cat, Ship, Hom, Petit Bois, and Dauphin) (Figure 1). The Sound is approximately 137 km long, varies in width from 11 to 24 km, and encloses a total area of 1,400 Ian2. Geologic Setting The Sound is part of the large interdeltaic sedimentary province of the northern margin of the Gulf of Mexico that is characterized by slow subsidence and deposition of terrigenous clastic sediments (Rainwater, 1964). The alternating transgressive and regressive conditions of the Pleistocene Epoch created the complex sedimentary rock stratigraphy that dominates the coastal geology of this area Pliocene sediments are absent along the coasts of Mississippi and Louisiana, so Late Pleistocene deposits (Citronelle Formation) unconformably overlie the Miocene Pascagoula-Hattiesburg Formations (Figure 2) (Stevenson et al., 1933; Brown et al., 1944; Lucas 1975; Otvos, 1981a; Otvos, 1982c). The Citronelle Formation is divided into three distinct units that were deposited when the northern Gulf of Mexico was inundated by the marine transgression of the Sangamon Interglacial Episode (Otvos, 1970, 1979, 1981a, 1982c). The oldest

PAGE 15

ocr lCT )() ocr TX r I MISSISSIPPI _____.,----Miuiui,,i Sound ALABAMA P' # .# # A'> J V cl <9" cl.P .... .......... if ()0 HomleiMd ";; PMn8ol8-...nd GulF OF MEXICO 0 II i 10 lO J GULF OF MEXICO o"' ,.,.. OnlY..,. SO' tronav'" wercov lone Nnrth &-rlcan Dot"ll ocr )(). JG' ocr w Ill' ocr lO Ill' ocr .-t 10' ocr ..,.Ill' ocr Figure 1 : Location of the Study Area. w

PAGE 16

Figure 2: Geologic Map of the State of Mississippi

PAGE 17

LEGEND Alluvium ... .. Coastal Deposits <( z E::l .. ... ... <( Loess ::;) 0 c:::J Citronollt Formation Pascagoula Hattiesburg forma tions c:=J. C otohoulo Formation CJ G roup Forest Hill Formation ... .. <( i= .. ... ... Jackson Group Claiborne Group Wikolll Group Midway Group "'[ 5 S.lmo Group ... u CJ Eutaw Group Tusca loosa Grou p i { -Miuiuippian D e voni a n GEOLOGIC MAP OF MISSISSIPPI 'MISSISSIPPI GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WILLI A M H A L S ELL MOORE DIRECTOR AND STAU G EOLOGIST SCAl E 1976 5 N

PAGE 18

6 Sangamon sediments (Biloxi Formation) consist of estuarine silty clays and were deposited in a back-beach environment. Beach and/or barrier sands with little or no clay content (Gulfport Formation) overlie these non-marine deposits. These sands are covered by inner-neritic marine silt, sand, and clay deposits that contain abundant shallow marine fossils and glauconite (Prairie Formation). Sea level fell and the shoreline migrated south of the modern barrier system (90 m according to Otvos, 1977) during the Wisconsin Glacial Episode Earlier Pleistocene deposits were eroded and weathered, producing an irregular, oxidized surface. These deposits were preserved and protected from erosion by minor subsidence of the Mississippi coast. Approximately 18,000 years ago, when sea level began to rise again (Fairbridge, 1958), these entrenched alluvial valleys of the Wisconsin became estuaries, and were partially filled with Early Holocene alluvial sand and mud deposits (Van Andel, 1960; Rainwater, 1964) (Figure 3). The Holocene geologic framework of the study area consists of a sandy barrier island system enclosing a back-barrier lagoon. The origin of this barrier island system has been the subject of considerable debate. Hoyt (1969) maintains that the barrier islands are drowned Pleistocene beach ridges while others, such as Otvos (1981b) and Shepard (1954), believe that nearshore aggradation of Early Holocene offshore subtidal shoals resulted in the emergence of the islands. Otvos (1976a, 1979, and 1982b) tentatively dates the formation of this barrier island system between 3,000 and 4,000 years ago when sea level was 1.6 m below present (Scholl 1965; Scholl and Stuiver, 1967). The Sound formed as a 9 m-deep back-barrier basin which extended from Mobile Bay west to New Orleans. Estuarine conditions predominate over most of the Sound (Eleuterius, 1978a) The estuarine facies consist primarily of estuarine silts and clays, and are characterized by variable lithology, a general lack of stratification, abundant bioturbation, and irregular pods of differing lithology (Curray and Moore, 1963;

PAGE 19

,_Titl lA lOU I WISt) IT _, ,, ..... ... \ L-1 't .. { \ 'f \ \ 't ,,,'' ,' / CM .... ...... \ \ --ll...-/ 10 LINE I LIHE-Z CUIJI 1-"1 ,_IIICNU -. '"' --.,,. 0 4 ... u ... M """' ISlAM) ,. tS.Ouf"J W(S l 5 oa.. 10 NIILOCEMl-MC(JfJ IIII'C*JI 1-._ID"lO--Y --fCIIIMAfiOII C ...... --II (X)IiSOUOU(O lll.(ISfOUMl-fUOCl.. AU. IMAL Dli'OIIft 1-. -s-, tLrY IAIDSI 1.-fiUillifiAllOI -
PAGE 20

8 Rainwater, 1964; Upshaw et al., 1966) (fable 1). Eastward from the mouth of the Pearl River, sand-silt-clay mixtures are the dominant sediment type (Figure 4). These mixtures gradually give way to silty clays, but the eastern extreme of the Sound becomes considerably more varied (Isophording, 1985). The contact between the estuarine sediments of the Sound and the barrier island sands is generally well-defmed, with a transition zone less than 400 m wide. The barrier island facies consist of well-sorted, medium-grained, mature quartzose sands containing virtually no feldspars (less than 3%). The beaches both along the Gulf and facing the Sound contain a suite of twenty-six different species of heavy minerals. Rich in metamorphic minerals, this suite is dominated by staurolite and kyanite (Hsu, 1960; Foxworth et al 1962), and tends to be concentrated in the silt-to-fme-sand fraction as thin, dark laminae. The upper shoreface-beach deposits consist of well-sorted, medium grained, quartzose, well-laminated sands. Laminae are planar to trough, low angled (less than 10" on Ship Island to 12" to 13" on the eastern end of Dauphin Island), and dip gulfward. Burrowing is scarce. Grainsize decreases with depth in a downward shore face direction and the sediments become more poorly sorted. The subaerial beach morphology of the islands is characterized by relatively wide and gently sloping profiles along the Gulf shoreline and narrow beaches with steep scarps on the Sound-side and at the inlets (Byrnes et al., 1991). The Gulf side of the islands consist of a broad, well-developed beach backed by dunes of variable height Intermittent beaches and marshes backed by similar dunes occur on the Sound side (Figures 5-8). The elevation averages between three and six meters and the islands are generally less than 3 km wide (Waller and Malbrough, 1976). The interior of the islands consist of either broad, low sand flats, 0 3 to 0.6 m above sea level, with marshes and shallow lakes or vegetated beach ridges 1.5 to 4.5 m high above sea level (Ludwick, 1964; Waller and Malbrough, 1976) (Figures 5-8).

PAGE 21

Location Western Mississippi Sound Ceatnl Mississippi Sound Eastern Mllsluappl Sound Mobile Bay, Alabama Table 1: Percentages of the Principal Clay Minerals and Carbon Constituents in the Bottom Sediments of Mississippi Sound and Mobile Bay. Montmorillonite Illite Kaolinite O!Janlc Carbon (%) (%) (%) (%TOC) 79. 00 15.00 7.00 0 .90 76.00 13.00 10 .00 0.81 70.00 11.00 19.00 0.76 70 .00 10.00 20.00 3 24 ---Carbon.te Carboa (% CaC03) 0 36 0 52 0 92 0 98 \0

PAGE 22

Figure 4: Surface Sediment Map of Mississippi Sound. (after Isphording, 1985) I 0 Kilometen 1'rojodlom UIM z16 lllaa )(AJm 10 -0

PAGE 23

-I -I 112 112 0 JCilometen 0 Milel ...-UDl:r-te Dooaa !IADI7 Petit Bois Island iiiii;p., .._.._____ Figure 5 : Geology and Active Processes of Petit Bois Island, Mississippi. (afte r Waller and Malbrou 2h. 1976 ) MARSH BEACH RIDGE EJ DUNE i l ACI'IVE BEACH ...... ......

PAGE 24

-I Ill 0 Kilomtan -I Ill 0 Mils lloljoolloa VIMr16 -HA!n7 Hom Island I Figure 6: Geology and Active Processes of Hom Island, Mississippi. (after Waller and Malbrough, 1976) MARSH BEACH RIDGE DUNE Ill ACTIVE BEACH -N

PAGE 25

I Ill 0 :Kilomean I Ill 0 Milel ......... IJ'D( :r-16 Ship Island I Figure 7: Geology and Active Processes of Ship Island, Mississippi. (after Waller and Malbrough 1976) MARSH BEACH RIDGE V :J.i DUNE Iii A CI'IVE BEACH -w

PAGE 26

-I Ill 0 Kilom ... -I Ill 0 Milee ....... UlK :r16 Doloa NAim Cat Island I Figure 8: Geology and Active Processes of Cat Island, Mississippi. (after Waller and Malbrough, 1976) Iii MARSH BEACH RIDGE ffiill DUNE IIIII ACTIVE BEACH ,_. +:>-

PAGE 27

15 The barrier islands have changed in size and shape throughout their history. In general, the eastern tips of the islands erode and the western tips accrete from the westward littoral drift. The islands sometimes enlarge and merge, but tropical stonns separate them and alter their dimensions. Brunton (1984) noticed that Petit Bois and Dauphin Islands were depicted as one island on earlier nautical charts The western ends of Horn Island and Ship Island have prograded approximately 2 km to the west (Byrnes et al 1991; Waller & Malbrough, 1976) The 1969 hurricane, Camille, breached Ship Island to form East and West Ship Islands Minor islands, such as the Isle of Capri (Rucker and Swoden, 1988) are constantly appearing and disappearing on this unstable shallow sandy, shoal platform. Deposition of the St. Bernard subdelta constricted western Mississippi Sound and further separated it from the Gulf of Mexico. This restricted the westward migration of sand along the shallow barrier island platform west of Ship Island and allowed the construction of north and south beach-ridge complex along the Gulf margin of Cat island (Figure 9). When the Mississippi River abandoned the St. Bernard subdelta, its subsidence and opened the western Sound to increased wave currents Sandy, shallow shoal areas reappeared west of Cat Island and the South-Hancock marshlands eroded west of St. Louis Bay (Otvos, 1973; 1982a and 1982b). Mississippi Sound is relatively stable, tectonically speaking, and exhibits a slow overall rate of subsidence (Penland et al., 1989) compared to the modern Mississippi Delta and the coastal regions of Louisiana. The western Sound is subsiding faster (0 6 em yrl) than the eastern Sound (0.3 em yrl) because of the rapid subsidence of the modern Mississippi River Delta (Kolb and Van Lopik, 1958) Many regional faults and several structural basins formed as a result of subsidence of the region. Byrnes et al. (1991) indicated that relative sea level has risen only about 0 2 em yrl. Penland et a1. (1987, 1989) studied the relative sea level rise rate of the entire northern Gulf of Mexico

PAGE 28

16 \ .... w I u

PAGE 29

for the periods from 1939 to 1983 and 1908 to 1988, respectively and found similar results; a relative sea level rise of 0 .15 em yr-1. 17 The primary sources of fresh water and terrigenous sediments to the Sound are the Pearl and Pascagoula River fluvial systems. Both rivers originate in the early Tertiary rocks of the Coastal Plain Province. The Pearl drains an area of 22,000 km2 and has an average annual discharge of 365m3 sec-1 while the Pascagoula River drains an area of 24,000 km2 and has an average discharge of 430m3 sec-1. Including the smaller rivers (Wolf, Jourdan, Biloxi, and Tchoutacabouffa), streams, and creeks, the total average annual discharge to the Sound is 883m3 sec-1 from a drainage area of 51,000 km2 (Wilson and Iseri, 1967). The input of fresh water and the exchange of saline waters from the Gulf result in salinities that vary from 0 to 30 parts per thousand (o/oo). Moderate salinity stratification occurs with seasonal and annual variations in intensity (McPhearson, 1970; Bault, 1972). Faunal evidence indicates that the salinity was once lower in the eastern part of the Sound, and the widening of the tidal pass between Petit Bois Island and Dauphin Island and construction of the Dauphin Island causeway have enhanced the flow of Gulf waters into the Sound and restricted the flow of fresh water from Mobile Bay (May, 1971; Lamb, 1972). Three major channels dredged by the Army Corps of Engineers extend across the Sound from north to south (Figure 10). Maintenance of these channels results in continuous dredging and dumping of dredged materials. Previously, dumping was in cross-Sound spoils areas adjacent to the channels. More recently, the dumping was moved offshore (Paulson et al., 1974; US Army Corps of Engineers, 1978). These spoils piles are affecting water circulation patterns and sedimentation processes within the Sound

PAGE 30

D Land Channel D Spoils Area -06 Feet Deep D 61 2 Feet Deep 12-18 Feet Deep 18-30 Feet Deep D >30 Feet Deep Figure 10: Bathymetry of Mississippi Sound and Adjacent Nearshore Areas (digitized from 1:40,000 NOAA Nautical charts) l!loolo ,,.75,1100 ........ vnl z.-." .......... 00

PAGE 31

19 Physical Setting The climate is humid, warm-temperate to subtropical Seasonal temperatures range from an average 11 C in January to 27 C in July, however, occasional freezing does occur (Eleuterius, 1974). Rainfall averages 165 em yr-1 and precipitation is fairly evenly distributed throughout the year, except for a slight concentration during the summer months (Figure 11). Summer temperatures are influenced by the Bermuda High which generates moist, southerly winds with an average velocity of 14.5 krn hr-1. In winter, winds are northerly and move in cold, continental air with average wind speeds in excess of 20 km hr-1 (Boone, 1973; Eleuterius and Beaugez, 1979) (Figure 12; Appendix A). Wind is the primary force influencing the overall circulation of the estuarine waters within the Sound (April et al., 1980; US Army Corps of Engineers, 1984) (Figure 13). Fetchand depth-limitations within the Sound result in an average wave height less than 0 3 m (Jensen, 1983). The average significant wave height is 1.0 m seaward of Ship Island at the US Army Corps of Engineers Wave Information Study (WIS) Station No. 26 (Byrnes et al., 1991). During large storm events, the water level is elevated and wave heights increase significantly over these ambient conditions (Boone, 1973). The historical evolution of the depth and width of the tidal passes suggests a mixed to tide dominated estuarine environment (Byrnes et al., 1991). Tidal variation is diurnal with an average period of 24.8 hours and an average range of 0.45 m. Despite this seemingly low tidal range, the large estuarine area and very shallow nearshore region result in a large tidal prism. The movement of this volume of water through the passes between the islands can cause as much as a 6-hour phase shift within the Sound. As a rule, during the flood, the tidal wave progresses from south to north and enters the Sound first through Hom Island Pass where it splits, travelling both east and west (Figure 13). The eastward progressing high water reaches Pass aux Herons approximately one hour after entering the Sound, while the westward flowing plume

PAGE 32

-1 J I j .. ii .. ... t ; i I .. 20 A Mean Monthly Precipitation 2 J .. .. J J I 0 D B Mean Monthly and Daily Temperature Maximums and Minimums. .. 10 70 .. .. ,. .. .. 0 Figure 11: Precipitation (A) and Temperature Distribution (B) for Coastal Mississippi. (taken from Dixon, 1990)

PAGE 33

21 N CUMULATIVE N N N JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL N N N N MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST N N N N SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Figure 12: Percentage Frequency of Surface Wind Direction for the Central Gulf Coast (in percentage time)

PAGE 34

CAT ISLAND MISSISSIPPI SHIP h ISLAND r GULF OF MEXICO MOBILE BAY DAUPHIN J ISLAND I'!" . LEGEND CURRENTS : :!:l:$) Figure 13: Current Patterns within the Study Area ( taken from Otvos, 1973) -II-0 I(' IS 2 0 ltUome ter-s Unlver sOl lronsve r se Wercotor Zone 1, North &merlcOt'l Ootvm 1927 N N

PAGE 35

23 reaches Lake Borgne after approximately two hours (Eleuterious, 1976; US Army Corp. of Engineers, 1984). In the passes, these flood tidal currents have speeds between 0.5 to 1.0 m secl, while the speeds of the ebb tidal currents vary from 1.8 to 3.5 m secl (Foxworth et al., 1962). Water generally flows east and out of the Sound on the ebb tide Superimposed wind induced currents on the Sound will shift the bifurcation area at Hom Island Pass east or west, depending on the eastwest component of the wind and on the stage of the tide. Winds with an eastward component induce a westward flowing current in the Sound which shifts the bifurcation area to the east (Petit Bois Pass) during the flood tide and to the west (Dog Keys Pass) during the ebb. Conversely, winds with a western component set up an eastward circulation pattern in the Sound that forces the bifurcation further to the west (Ship Island Pass) on the flood and a split at Petit Bois Pass on the ebb (Eleuterious, 1976; US Army Corp. of Engineers, 1984). The dominant surface current is a 50 to 150 em secl westward moving longshore current created by the prevailing southeasterly winds (Figure 13). This current is sufficient to gradually transport sandsize sediments to the west (Foxworth et al., 1962), however episodic hurricane events appear to be equally important in affecting significant shoreline changes (Otvos, 1979). High-energy, short-duration events are particularly devastating in the northern Gulf of Mexico where storm frequency is high and ground elevation is low (US Army Corps of Engineers, 1970; Nummedal et al 1980b; Penland et al., 1980; Penland et al., 1985). No hurricanes were recorded in this area during the course of this study.

PAGE 36

24 PREVIOUS STUDIES Four studies have examined shoreline change for the entire barrier island system of Mississippi Sound. Waller and Malbrough (1976) provided the first quantitative summary of change using maps and aerial photography from 1848 to 1973 Otvos (1979) established a qualitative history of shoreline evolution using mid-18th century maps, written accounts, and the data from Waller and Malbrough (1976). Shabica et al. (1984) used aerial photography to document relatively short-term (1957 to 1980) changes in shoreline position. Most recently, Byrnes et al (1991) quantified the long-term shoreline changes (1847 to 1986) using US Coast and Geodetic Survey topographic maps (NOS T-sheets) and near-vertical aerial photography within the framework of a Geographic Information System (GIS) Waller and Malbrough (1976) used United States Geological Survey (USGS) 75minute quadrangle maps as a base map for their study All NOS T -sheets and aerial photographs were either enlarged or reduced to the precise scale of the USGS topographic maps for comparison of shoreline position. Rates of change were calculated at 305m longshore intervals and shoreline change measurements were made to m. Long-term rates of Gulf shoreline movement and the relative rate of areal change were calculated To demonstrate the importance of lateral island migration in response to west-ward directed longshore transport, Waller and Malbrough (1976) also tabulated net average rates of erosion and accretion on the east and west ends of the islands To illustrate the overall change along the margins of each island, the initial and fmal shoreline positions reported by Waller and Malbrough (1976) were digitized, registered, and plotted using ARC/INFO (Figures 14 and 15) Shabica et al. (1984) documented short-term shoreline changes for the Mississippi barrier islands using near-vertical aerial photographs. Prior to annotating high-water shoreline position, 1 : 5,000 scale base maps were produced by photo-enlarging USGS 7 5

PAGE 37

Petit Bois Island u: Kil"'meten '" 30" II M iles SS"I6 ....., wfQ w "' JO" 1:! t.tolc Horn Island Figure 14: Historic Change of Petit Bois and Hom Islands, MS. latter Waller and Malbrough, 1976)

PAGE 38

8 4 7 Ship Island 30" I()L----------------------------...;.;.-----....1 I I 30" 1 5 -1 1/l 112 89 '03 Cat Island K ilometers M ile s 30' 1 1....._ ______ Figure 15: Historic Change of Ship and Cat Islands, MS. (after Waller and Malbrough, 1976) 26

PAGE 39

27 minute quadrangles. Aerial photographs were then enlarged (but not rectified) to the scale of the base map, and measurements of shoreiine position change were made (Figure 16), based upon a sampling interval of 200 to 300 meters The average rate of retreat or progradation from 1957-1980 was then calculated Byrnes et al., (1991) provided the most recent quantification of historical shoreline change within the framework of a GIS. The data from the from near-vertical aerial photos and NOS T-sheets were rectified to common stable ground points within the most recent (January 1966) NOS T-sheet at a scale of 1:10,000 using a Zoom Transfer Scope. The high water shoreline was identified, the information was digitized and maps were compiled (Figures 17 and 18). Shoreline change was then quantified at 50 m longshore intervals They calculated the average rate of retreat or progradation from 1848-1986. The results of these previous studies that quantified change have been summarized in Table 2. There are some descrepancies in the figures, but some conclusions regarding regional trends in shoreline dynamics can be drawn. A greater shoreline displacement associated with longshore transport processes result from incident wave processes and the impacts of tropical storms than cross-shore transport processes Similarly, because the source of sand for these barrier islands is to the east, the rate of lateral migration decreases to the west Cat Island is an anomaly to this trend. It is influenced by different hydrologic processes that resulted from the formation of the St Bernard sub-delta complex of the Mississippi River Deltaic system. Due to its different shoreline orientation, erosion of the southern spit is documented throughout

PAGE 40

w MISSISSIPPI C.. N MISSISSIPPI ';)Round lslond Wel t Sh i p lslond Petit B oi s Island (3.31 ii l L--11 .. ,_ 'l(j 1ornewn s.nc1 1 sllnd 0 2 4 I I 10 Figure 16 : Historic Change of the Mississippi Sound Barrier Islands. (after Sbabica et al. 1984) 28 3 0

PAGE 41

88.32' 30.15' 30.13' 88.:28' LEGEND 1848 I I 1986 I&Wl6t 88.2<4' 88.20' 88.16' PedtBokllla.t 0 I 2 3 ill I Kilometers UTM -16, NAO 83 30.18! .... I 30 I ee 45 eeo Honlalaad ... .. .=:: > . :.. 0 I 2 J p+ I Kilometers UTt,A -16, NAO 83 . : :::: === = ........ !::: eeJs' LEGEND 1849 I I 19 8 6 iiVW'll'i! 99o' __ ._ __ Figure 17: Historic Chang e of Petit Boi s and Hom Island s MS (after Bymea et al 1991 )

PAGE 42

30'14' 88'58' LECENO r 1 848 1 1 9 7 6 liS&S66" Ship lslaad eeso 0 z J -:llomtt'l I UTW li. NAO al ________ ._ ____ H'll' Xl'lS' 30'13' LEGE hi> 11848 .1986 wmsa 0 Ill 2 Kllomt UTW 16, NAO 83 J I n'0'7' 89"03' Cat lalaad Figure 18: Historic Change of Ship and Cat Islands, MS. (after Bymea et al .. 1991) 30

PAGE 43

Author Waller and Malbrough, 1976 Shabica et al. 1984 Byrnes et. al., 1991 Table 2 : Results from the Previous Shoreline Change Studies for the Barrier Islands of Mississippi Sound A vg. Rate of Change Avg. Rate of Change A vg. Rate of Change Time Name of the Island Gulf Shoreline East End West End (yrs) (rn/yr) (rn/yr) (rn/yr) 124 Petit Bois Island 0.85 -99.01 36.23 Hom Island 0.60 -36.29 42.68 Ship Island -3 .00 -13.46 9.31 Cat Island -2.40 -19 .29 5.02 23 Petit Bois Island -0.80 nd (no data) nd (no data) Hom Island 0.30 nd nd West Ship Island 0.60 nd nd East Ship Island -6 .40 nd nd Cat Island 2.50 nd nd 138 Petit Bois Island 2.50 -89.90 31.30 Hom Island 0.00 -39.30 34.50 Ship Island 2.90 -1.50 9 .60 Cat Island -2.4 2 4 no data ( +) progradation ( +) accretion ( +) accretion (-)retreat ( -) erosion (-)erosion Net Change of Island Area (%) -24.0 -7.0 -33.1 -2 2.0 nd (no data) nd nd nd nd -34. 0 -15. 0 -38.0 -29.0 -w -

PAGE 44

32 REMOTE SENSING SYSTEMS Multispectral remotely sensed digital imagery was acquired by the Systeme Probatoire d'Observation de la Terre (SPOT) satellite and the Calibrated Airborne Multispectral Scanner (CAMS) instruments. The SPOT multispectral imager simultaneously collects three channels of data from every point on the Earth that corresponds to a detector (CCD) in the satellite's array (Figure 19) The Earth distance between two contiguous elements on the same CCD array is the line sampling interval, and reflects the angular spac i ng separating each CCD in the instrument and the altitude of the sensor. The d i stance between two adjacent elements in successive lines is the column sampling interval, and is derived from the time interval between the acquisition of two successive lines. This time interval, known as the line period is 3.008 milliseconds for the SPOT Haute Resolution Visible (HRV) instrument The column sampling interval is therefore equal to the distance the imaged line is displaced during one line period (approximately 20 m for SPOT data). The HRV instrument is pointed 7 S km behind the sub-satellite point in the x direction (Figure 20). Viewing angles are defmed in 0.6 steps within a range of 27 A view angle of 0 16 is considered nadir viewing because of the fixed x-offset and the constant orbit height (840 km). View angles between 7 .S0 are considered vertical, while angles with an absolute value greater than 7 .S0 are oblique. Images up to 47S km to the right or left of the satellite's ground track can be obtained at oblique viewing angles. The dimensions of the sides of the scene depend primarily on the viewing angle and the latitude of acquisition. The width remains roughly constant at 60 km on the Earth's surface in the along-track direction and can vary between 60 km and 81.S km in the across-track direction. The resolution of a pixel is 20 m when the image incidence angle is close to vertical and increases to 27.2 mat the extreme off-nadir angles

PAGE 45

s (/, ; 1 0 0 9 0 8 0 7 0.6 0 5 0 4 0 3 0.2 0.1 400 600 SUd 1 0 09 0 8 0 7 0 6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0 2 0 1 400 Sitellita 700 800 900 700 800 900 CCO L inur Arrv '-l.7--Opti u l CAnter EARTH ot HAV Telescope Ntw L int lmagrd Anult ol S.tallita Motion A IN a v t l t ngth (nml lnml B Figure 19: SPOT Spectral Responce Curves (A) and Image Acquisition (B) 33

PAGE 46

X SATELLITE I r , I I t < I r:,,. I /'11\:)' / I t)A: .. ;\\ :\ -: .:. / f / / /. i! I (mod< XS ) f I Track I I I Figure 20: Schematic of the Satellite Scanner Geometry. (taken from SPOT Processing Manual) N s

PAGE 47

35 The CAMS is a 9 channel scanning radiometer that forms a continuous image of ground features by recording consecutive lines of spectral radiance values. Different radiance values are represented by varying digital numbers (DNs) The scanner has an instantaneous field of view (IFOV) of angular size alpha (a) in both directions (Figure 21) Alpha for the CAMS instrument is equal to 2.5 milliradians. The CAMS is typically flown from a Lear 23 jet. The IFOV is scanned through an angle (8) at right angles to the direction of the aircraft's motion As the aircraft carries the scanner forward, successive scan lines cover different strips on the earth's surface. The pilot must control the velocity of the aircraft and the instrument's scan rate to prevent data gaps It is important to note that the dimension of the IFOV increases as 8 increases from 0 (nadir) Assuming a level aircraft in which the roll, pitch and yaw angles are zero, the dimension of this IFOV can be calculated at any given scan angle (8) (Figure 21). The CAMS instrument scans from left to right, at a rate than can vary incrementally from 6 to 80 scans sec-1 through an angle approximately 50.13 off nadir. In addition to digital imagery, the CAMS system also records navigation information and calibration statistics during each scan The navigation data contain information from the aircraft's inertial navigation unit (INU) such as latitude, longitude, and time This information is used to locate the position (in latitude and longitude) and the true heading of the aircraft during the data capture of a particular scan line. There are 700 video (image) elements, or an array of DNs that represent the digitized energy received by the sensor in nine spectral wavebands (Appendix B). Calibration statistics provide system noise as recorded by two black bodies and calibration radiance from a 9-inch integrating sphere system. The number of scan lines in a flight line is solely dependent upon the mandates of the mission. The ground resolution (m) of the pixels in a flightline depends on the altitude of data collection (Equation 1).

PAGE 48

OVERLAP -x T DIRECTION OF FLIGHT y ,. -1 -----Ar e = 45 IFOV NADIR OVERLAP = 1.414$2 ah SEC28 = 2S1 h Figure 21: Schematic of the Airborne Scanner Geometry. (co mpiled from JXOvided by NASA 'a S1L, Stennil Spece Centu) +x SCAN DIRECTION 36

PAGE 49

37 Resolution (m) = tan (IFOV) Altitude (m) (1) where: IFOV= 2 5 mr Altitude (m) = the altitude of the aircraft during data collection A summary of the spectral and spatial characteristics of these sensors is provided in Table 3. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Table 3: Characteristics of the Remote Sensing Systems. Blue Green Red Red Near Infrared Near Infrared Thermal Infrared Spectral Banch Widths SPOT-HRV XSl. 0.50-0.59 XS2 0 61-0.68 XS3. 0.79-0 89 Spatial Resolution (m) 20.0 Swath Width (km) 60 0 Dlgltlzatlon Level 8-bit ij.Lm) CAMS 0 45-0 .52 0 52-0 60 0 60-0 .63 0 63-0 69 0 69-0 76 0 76-0.90 1.55-1.75 2 .08-2.35 10.50 12.50 Spatial Resolution (m) 10.01 Swath Width (km) 7 01 Dlgltizatlon Level 8 bit 1 flown at an altitude of 402336 m for this study.

PAGE 50

38 METHODS The methods developed to quantify change between two multispectral data types that have never before quantitatively compared, were derived from trial and error The digital imagery were processed using the ELAS (Beverley and Penton, 1989) and ARC/INFO processing software Flow charts outlining the image processing methods and ELAS modules used are given in Appendix C. The data analyses were performed at the Florida Department of Natural Resources, the University of South Florida Department of Marine Science, and NASA's Science and Technology Lab o ratory ( STL ) Stennis Space Center, Mississippi. Digital Imagery The SPOT data consisted of two simultaneously obtained images which have the same central latitude, orientation angle (y), and approximately 2,000 m of overlap. The "SPOT-la" image (Scene No. 16042898711061645242X) was collected by the HRV-2 sensor and the "SPOT-lb" image (Scene No. 1603289871106 1 645251X) was collected by the HRV-1 sensor. Together, these images provide complete coverage of the Mississippi Sound barrier islands and a portion of the coastal mainland (Figure 22). It is important to mention, that these data were pre-processed to different levels by SPOT Image Corporation SPOT-la was processed to SPOT Level lA, while SPOT-lb was processed to SPOT LevellB (Appendix D). LevellB data is geometrically corrected to remove earth rotation effects, resampled in the across-track direction to remove off-nadir imaging effects, and resampled so that each pixel represents a 20 m x 20 m (400m2) area of the Earth's surface. The ancillary information needed to perform these operations is proprietary and is therefore, not released by SPOT Image Corporation Hence, differences in the preprocessing to remove geometric distortions in these two images had to be addressed

PAGE 51

39 > -

PAGE 52

40 The linear distribution of the Mississippi Sound barrier islands and their relatively narrow width ( < 3 km) allowed all of the islands to be contained in a single 10m CAMS flight line. The 8,500 scanlines extracted from S1L's mission flight line MX478.11 for this change analysis are shown in Figure 23 Preprocessing Several factors that have been shown to affect the quality of remotely sensed data were evaluated Large variations in solar elevation can degrade d i gital data by obscuring or insufficiently illuminating important shoreline and coastal detail (Huh et al., 1991). The similarity of the solar zenith angles recorded during the acquisition of the SPOT and CAMS data (52.0" and 49.3" respectively) coupled with the assumption that these angles remained constant during data collection suggests that solar elevation was not a significant source of variation between these data. Sensor-specific factors such as sensor calibration errors, sensor radiometric resolution. and signal digitization errors were addressed Converting the DNs to reflectance values (albedo) was proposed to significantly reduce the errors that would result from a quantitative comparison of data from different sensors (Slater, 1980; Robinson, 1985; Teillet, 1986). Daily and monthly weather data were obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Weather Service, Mobile, Alabama Station for the period from October, 1987, to December, 1991. The meteorological conditions (wind, temperature, pressure, and etc.) were similar during the collection of these data (Table 4).

PAGE 53

c c CD c c p &. ZL a. ...., c :I :I 0 1.1) A. A. .. .. .. .. '(''c" { \I V ) I }: I #\II'\(\( I '\1 ,, ,, ) dA' ''c''<' I f ( I I ''v ,., , ) ( I I "_.. v ,, ,, \ '\ ( ,, ., ,, ,..,,#\ ._,."\,\ I ''"',,' I ( ) \ I l I ) ( 8 I ./'"b" \1 v , ,, } I' "" \/,,\,,,h.' I\ .1\ I 1 \ \I \ I ( ) ( /\ / \1 V \ I } ) ,..,, '''' \ /,,\ ,''>' '1: I \ 1\ I \ \ I I ( ) I ( 1\ I \I \1 \ }, ) '\'' _,,, ( ; \, \ 1 ,, >''I ,., I , \,( I } :\>' ( <: o") >' \ ''i ,, I ( I } /\ I 'c'' I ) \ \1 \''>' )/ I \ 1\ \I \ .ft"b,' ( ,\,c ,,, ,}, ', I \ ( I \, \ .f!.,, >' '1, ,, ,, .. .. ,. i ; }:/ \ \, } ... : "" "f \ ,, } \ ' c"''c' '', ,, v ,, ,, > , ''( ( ) \,,\, )' ,, \ 1 \ ( ''I ('< t \I \1 \I )I ';_p ,,, : <,..,,.,, \ 0 0 v ... )'( "" c "" 41 ......

PAGE 54

42 Table 4: Weather Conditions at the Mobile, Alabama Station of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Weather Service During Data Acquisition SPOT CAMS Date Nov 6, 1987 Nov 1, 1991 Time of Image Acquisition (LS1) 1045 1345 Time of Data Collection (LS1) 1051 1350 TemperatUre eF) 63 68 Dew Pt. (0F) 25 44 Rei. Humidity(%) 23 42. 1 Sea Level Pressure (Mbs) 256 138 Station Pressure (Ins) 30 05 29 705 Wind Direction (Degrees) 5 28 Wind Speed (Kts) 14 13 The adverse effects of atmospheric attenuation and atmospheric path radiance (haze) on the DNs collected by SPOT-HRV sensors are in effect removed by the instrument's 'detector radiometric equalization' process The maximum effects of atmospheric backscatter were evaluated in the CAMS data by generating line plots and frequencies along a scan line( 50.13 from nadir). Channels 1 and 2 were selected because Rayleigh's Law states that the efficiency with which solar radiation is scattered by air molecules and particulates is proportional to IJA.4. Channell was evaluated to determine the maximum elevation of the DNs recorded, while channel 2 was evaluated because the wavelengths in this channel are equivalent to SPOTs shortest spectral channel, XS 1 Correction of the atmospheric effects was not performed during the calibration of the D N s to spectral reflectance Processing There are two important aspects of quantitative change analysis for coastal environments: registering the data to the same map projection; and accurately identifying

PAGE 55

the land/water interface. Registration of these data was dependant upon the removal of the correctable differences between the raw data by creating ou t put images with comparable internal geometric fidelity, similar spatial resolution, and a common map projection The differential pre processed levels of the SPOT data and the inherent differences in the spectral and spatial characteristics of these data mandated that a methodology be developed that could be applied effectively to both levels of the SPOT data, and to the CAMS data. The SPOT -1 b data served as the foundation upon which these methods were developed because the geometric and radiometric distortions had been corrected. Data Rectification 43 Forty-eight (48) control points were identified in the SPOT-1b image and digitized as latitude/longitude pairs from 7.5 minute USGS Quadrangle Maps. Forty-one (Appendix E) of these points were used to generate a 1 st..order global polynom i al transfonnation model used to georeference the entire SPOT 1 b image. The root mean square (RMS) errors of this model were 1.866 x 10 -4 ( = 20 m) and 2.095 x 10 -4 (= 20 m) in the X andY-directions, respectiveiy. The latitude/longitude pairs of the control points were projected to Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM), Zone 16 coordinates prior to applying this transformation to the raw data. A UTM projection was selected to enhance the precision of the change analysis by providing a common unit of measure between the coordinate system and the pixel resolution of the imagery. Improvements in the accuracy of the registration model w e re obtained by using one image as a digital basemap to which the comparison image was remapped In remote and/or uninhabited areas, such as the barrier islands in question, better registration can be obtained by selecting control points based upon their spectral characteristics than through the identification of mapped features.

PAGE 56

44 Unlike the SPOT-1b data. the SPOT-1a data was not resampled to ensure a pixel resolution of 20m x 20m and therefore, lacks the same internal geometric fidelity A simple spatial translation and rotation based upon the navigation information effectively oriented the data, but failed to correct the geometric distortions that result from off-nadir viewing and the Earth s curvature and rotation. A more highly controlled model was produced by increasing the number of control points digitized from 7.5 minute USGS Quadrangle Maps. One hundred (100) of the original one hundred and twenty-five (125) control points selected (Appendix E) were used to generate a 1 sLorder global polynomial transformation model with RMS errors equal to 1.53 xlO -4 (= 18m) and 1.58 xlO -4 ("" 18 m) respectively The output coordinates from this model were projected to UfM coordinates and a single channel of the SPOT -1 a image was georeferenced and projected to evaluate this model and to determine if assumptions regarding the lack of internal geometric fidelity of these data were correct Several common points between these data and the georeferenced and projected SPOT -1 b image were selected and the merge parameters were calculated The registration errors identified between these images increased from 0 pixels over the mainland areas to a maximum of 1.917 pixels (38m) over the eastern tip of East Ship Island, and were confined to the across-swath direction. Better registration of the mainland areas is assumed to be due to better control of the model over these areas. For this reason, it was assumed projecting the CAMS image during the rectification process would provide a better digital basemap for the registration of the remaining islands in the study area (Hom, Petit Bois, and the western terminus of Dauphin Island ). The transformation model was used to georeference the SPOT-la image to a latitude/longitude coordinate system This model was assumed to be adequate due to the registration of the merge points on the mainland and the realization that the registration model can be used to further correct the internal geometry of the islands.

PAGE 57

45 To avoid duplication of effort and the possible introduction of error, all 8,500 scanlines of the raw CAMS data were processed Algorithms have been developed within ELAS to remove the "known" geometric distortions in raw CAMS data such as roll, pitch, and yaw. The model was developed from the INU data. Instrument noise and the systematic errors contained in the latitude, longitude, and true heading data were reduced by removing (flltering) suspect values. The small scale variations that result from the resolution of the INU instrument were then smoothed using a cubic spline regression. The scanning characteristics of the sensor required in these algorithms have been limited to the pixel resolution ("), the pitch angle ("), and the altitude (m) of the aircraft during data collection The pixel resolution value (m) previously determine from Equation 1 were converted to degrees latitude and degrees longitude using Equations 2 and 3. width (0 Latitude)= [width (m) I ((21t x Rex 1360)] (2) where : width (m) = the value from Equation 1 Re =the equatorial radius of the earth in meters (6,378,137 m) 9 = the latitude of data collection (30.435) height e Longitude)= [width (m) I ((21t X Rp) 1360)] (3) where: width (m) z the value from the equation above, Rp =the polar radius of the earth in meters (6,356,752 m) The pitch angle was assumed to be 3 (Dr. Richard Miller, pers. comm . 1991) and the altitude was obtained from the pilot's flight log. The model was used to georeference the raw CAMS data to a latitude/longitude grid.

PAGE 58

46 The rectification information contained in the model was projected to UTM coordinates and used to produce a second output file. Both CAMS data flles were resampled from a 100m2 to a 400m2 pixel resolution using a nearest-neighbor method This resampling could not be performed prior to the rectification process because the smoothed navigation data and the "known" corrections are only applicable to the raw data The projected file (CAMS-1a) was created to serve as a digital basemap to which the SPOT-1a data were registered, while the islands from the latitude/longitude rectified image (CAMS lb) were registered to the SPOT-1b basemap. The spatial coverage of each data set was limited to avoid storage problems created by the large volume of data produced during rectification. The lower 1000 lines were extracted from the SPOT-1b basemap and the SPOT-la image. The 2000+ lines removed from each image were essential to the georeferencing models, however, the barrier islands are spatially confined to each of these 1000 line subsets. The coverage of the 20 m CAMS-1 b data was limited to Cat and Ship Islands while these islands were eliminated from the 20m CAMS 1a basemap Da/Q Registration The registration process was developed using a single channel subset from the georeferenced CAMS-1 b data. A single channel was chosen to minimize processing time and the size of the output image. Co-registration models using more than a single island proved to be ineffective. Unlike the north-south registration errors the east-west errors could not be corrected by increasing the number of control points used by a model. These along-track offsets ranged from 580 m when using a highly-interpolative, poorly controlled registration model, to 40 m when a tightly-controlled model was utilized The source of these errors was assumed to be an artifact of the water between the islands because despite the density of the control points identified within the islands, the model was forced to perform considerable interpolation between them.

PAGE 59

47 Due to these findings, each of the islands from the rectified images (the CAMS-1 b and the SPOT-la) was copied to a unique image and registered individually. Minimizing the registration errors using this method was based upon three assumptions. First, limiting the overall area to be remapped would minimize the control required by the model. Next, limiting the areas which were poorly controlled would limit the interpolation required by the model. Finally, if the areas of limited control were not only reduced but became peripheral to the areas of good control (the islands), then the model would be centered where it is most controlled. This would produce a better model because the less controlled areas around the islands would be extrapolated and no longer interpolated. Co-registration of these images was accomplished using the same principles as the georeferencing process applied to the raw SPOT-lb data Targets were identified in both data sets for each island based upon their spectral character and location The element/line locations of these targets were directly linked to the liTM coordinates of the same targets in the appropriate basemap and a control point files were created for each island. Table 5 summarizes the number (N) and RMS errors of the 1st-order global polynomial transformation model used to register each islands Table 5 : Summary of the Registration Parameters by Island lslaod N XRMS(m) Y-RMS(m) Basemap Cat Island 16 6.70 6 08 SPOT-1b Ship Island 16 7.18 4 50 SPOT-1b Hom Island 28 8.69 13.95 CAMS-la Petit Bois Island 26 6 83 2 28 CAMS-1a Dauphin Island 10 5.96 4 78 CAMS-1a

PAGE 60

Radiometric Calibration Albedo is the ratio of the energy at any wavelength (A.), reflected by a surface (upward irradiance Eu(A.)) to the amount of energy hitting that surface (downward irradiance, Ed(A.)) That is, A (A.)= 48 (4) Assuming a Lambertian surface and a 1 sCorder approximation of Ed(A.), Equation 4 can be rewritten as: 1t L(A.) A (A.)= E0(A.) cos 80 where: L(A.) =Radiance or the energy (in mW m-2 ster-1) collected over waveband {l) Eo0..) = the extraterrestrial solar irradiance normalized over the spectral baDd (A.) cos 9o = the cosine of the solar zenith angle (5) Radiance (L) is the amount of energy measured by the sensor and then converted to a DN. The equation used to convert the DNs back to radiance can be written as: L = g(A.) DN(A.) + b(A.) where: g(A.) = the per count calibration value use to normalize the digital value for waveband (A.) DN(A.) =the count value (or digital number) recorded in waveband (A.) b(A.) =the offset (or bias) calibration value for waveband (A.) (6) Substituting the equation for Radiance into Equation 5, changes the equation for Albedo (A) as follows :

PAGE 61

1t g(A.) A (A.) = DN{A.) + E0(A.) *cos s0 49 1t b(A.) (7) E0(A.) *cos s0 For SPOT data, the "detector radiometric equalization" process removes the bias (b(A.)) from the DNs obtained by the satellite Equation 8 was used to calibrate the DNs obtained by the SPOTHRV sensors to albedo. 1t DN(A.) g{A.) A (A.)= E0(A.) cos S0 where : g(A) = the per count calibration value use to normalize the digital value for waveband (A) Eo(A) = the extraterrestrial solar irradiance normalized over the spectral band (A) cos eo = the cosine of the solar zenith angle (8) The g(A.) values are both sensor and waveband specific and were calculated from the absolute calibration coefficients posted in the header flies of the SPOT images. These values are summarized in Table 6. Table 6: SPOT Calibration Values. Band HRV-1 Sensor (SPOT-lb) HRV 1 Se010r (SPOT -la) (mW cm ster_l (mW cm ster_l XSl 0.083730 0 084167 XSl 0 077886 0 088744 XS3 0 094064 0 098090

PAGE 62

The nonnalized extraterrestrial solar irradiance (Eo) values modified from Price (1981) and used to calibrate the SPOT data are contained in Table 7. Table 7: Extraterrestrial Solar Irradiance Values (Eo (A.)) for the SPOT Sensors Band HRV-1 Sensor (SPOT 1b) HRV-l Sensor (SPOT-la) ( mW cm ster.l J.Ull-1) (mW cm 2 ster 1 J.UD-1 ) XS1 185.04 184.10 XSl 162.73 158. 34 XS3 108. 70 103. 99 50 Mean values were calculated for the onboard calibration parameters (BB 1, BB2, and CalLamp) and the Lamp and Bandpass values were provided by Dr. Richard Miller at NASA s Stennis Space Center (Table 8). Table 8: CAMS Calibration Parameters by Waveband. Calibration Parameters Channell Channel 4 Channel 6 881 10.2087 11.1281 9 9155 CalLamp 88 .2527 1663630 1883210 882 10 .1503 11.1145 10 0432 8811 10.1795 11.1213 9 9793 Lamp 0 2170 0 2350 0 9290 Bandpass 0.0720 0 0770 0 1110 Weal 3 0139 3 0519 83694 W cal is the energy calibration coefficient that corrects for variations in these on board calibration values and relates them to the primary standards These parameters were used to calculated reflectance from the DNs collected by the CAMS instrument (Equation 9).

PAGE 63

[(DN(/..)BB12DV(/..))/(Cal Lamp(/..)BB12DV(/..))] x Weal(/..) x 1t A(/..)= -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------E0(A.) x cos e where : BB12DV =the average ofBB1 and BB2 Cal Lamp = the average of the o nboard calibration lamp Weal= the energy calibration value= Lamp /Bandpass Eo0..) = the extraterrestrial solar irradiance normalized over the spectral band (l) cos eo = the cosine of the solar zenith angle 51 (9) The extraterrestrial solar irradiance (Eo) values nonnalized to the spectral bands of the CAMS sensor were also provided by Dr. Miller (Table 9). These values and the values taken from Price (1981) were calculated from the solar spectral irradiance values published by Neckel and Labs (1981). Table 9: Extraterrestrial Solar Irradiance Values
PAGE 64

52 written to convert the 1-bit, integer DN of every pixel in each channel of the input data to its corresponding 4-bit, floating point albedo value Identification of Change The location of the land/water interface (the pixels with a spectral signature representing 50% water and 50% land) was determined by subtracting the albedo (A) values calculated for the shortest waveband of visible light processed (CAMS channel 2 and SPOT channel XSl) from the albedos calculated for the longest waveband of light processed (CAMS channel 6 and SPOT channel XS3). The programs which performed these operations were written so that negative and zero values obtained during the subtraction were set equal to zero, in effect masking out the water. Additional programs were written to extract and convert the 4-bit, floating point Albedo data from these images to a single-bit, integer format. Pixels from the input image that had a difference value greater than zero (land) were arbitrarily set equal to the value 100 in the output image, while values equal to zero (water) remained zero Co-registration of the digital images provided a direct, simple way to examine change. Difference images were created by subtracting the pixel values contained in SPOT 1987 from those in CAMS 1991 as outlined in Table 10. Table 10 : Principles of Mathematical Change Mapping CAMS SPOT (type & value) (type & value) (type & value) Land (100) Land (100) No Change (0) Water (0) Water (0) No Change (0) Land (100) Water (0) Accretion (80) Water (0) Land (100) Erosion ( 80)

PAGE 65

53 To maintain the integer format of the difference images and to simplify the visual identification of change, pixels with a negative output value were set equal to 100, pixels with an output value equal to zero were left equal to zero, and pixels with a positive output value were set equal to 250. Removal or the Systematic Bias Tide guage data obtained from the Hydrology and Hydraulics Branch, Mobile District of the US Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile Alabama (Appendix F) were used to estimate tidal levels at the time of data capture. These values were converted to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929 and used to determine the adjusted Total Range recorded at each station (Table 11) Table 11: Tidal Height Measured from Mean Low Water (MLW) During Data Acquisition Station Name Dauphin Island AI.. Pascagoula, MS Biloxi. MS Gulfport, MS I Data acquired at 1045 LST 2Data acquired at 1345 LST SPOT1 Tidal Height (m) -0 1433 0 0823 -0 2057 -0. 0152 cAMS2 Tidal Height (m) 0 .3 261 0.2484 0 0991 0 .2 134 Total Range (m) 0.4694 0.3307 0.3048 0 .2286 The SPOT data were imaged during ebb tide, while the CAMS data were collected on the flood tide. This systematic difference causes erroneous changes in shoreline position and island area to be identified because a greater amount of land was exposed during the collection of the SPOT data. Beach proflies were not collected as part of this study, so an avera_ge beach slope of 3 was obtained from the Louisiana Geolo!!ical

PAGE 66

54 Survey (Mark Byrnes pers. comm 1992) Assuming a linear relationship between the location of the islands and the variation in Total Range, an Estimated Tidal Range was determined for each island and used to calculate the Shoreline Change, Systematic Bias, and Maximum Bias in the data (Equation 10 ; Table 12). These biases have been removed from all change calculation Shoreline Change (m) = Tidal Range (m) I 0.0523 (10) where : 0.0523 = tan 3 Table 12: Shoreline Change and Systematic Bias Calculated for Each Island Due to the Differential Tidal Height Estimated ShoreUne Mulmum3 Island Tidal Range Change Pertmeter1 Bias Bias (m) (m) (m) (ba ) (ba) Dauphin Island 0 4694 8.9751 11640 .00 10-45 10 45 Petit Bois Island 0 3655 6 9885 33760 .00 23.59 30.30 Small Islands 0 3481 6.6558 4000 00 2 66 3.59 Hom Island 031 28 5.9809 70160 .00 41.96 62 97 East Ship Island 0.3048 5 8279 17960 .00 10.47 16.11 West Ship Island 0 2858 5.4646 15560.00 8.50 13 97 Cat Island 0 2286 4.3709 63200.00 27.62 56.n 10btained from the 1987 SPOT Imagery 2 Calculated by multiplying the Shoreline Change and Perimeter then converting to hectares J calculated by multiplying the maximum Shoreline Change ( 8 9 7 51 m ) and Perimeter then converting to hectares The effect the removal of this bias has on the areal changes recorded for each island are presented in Table 13.

PAGE 67

Island Name Cat Island Ship Island (Total) West Ship East Ship Hom Island Petit Bois Island (Total) Small Islands Petit Boia Island _W. T1p Dauphin Island Table 13: Areas of Exposed Land and the Net Change Calculations for the Islands of the Mississippi Sound Barrier Island Complex. Sytematic 1987 Area 1991 Area Erosion Accretion Change Bias Net Change (ba) (ba) (ba) (ba) (ba) (ba) (ba) 886.00 877 64 -40 56 32.20 -8.36 27.62 19.26 378.01 353 60 -45 .8 8 21.45 24.41 18.97 5 .44 229.56 214 72 -25.64 10.80 -14.84 8.50 -6.34 148.45 138.88 -20 24 10.65 9 57 10.47 0.90 1345 .80 1263 45 -134 .71 52. 37 82.35 41.96 -40 39 487 95 485 .2 2 -28.36 25 .61 -2. 73 26. 25 2352 24.16 19.96 -8 56 5.08 -4 .2 0 2 .66 -1.54 463.79 465.26 19 80 2053 1.47 23.59 25 06 140.64 139.20 -14 .26 13.32 -1.44 10.45 9.01 Net Change (%) 2.17 1.44 -2.76 0.61 -3.00 4 82 -6 .37j 5 40j 6.41] (,A VI

PAGE 68

56 Uncertainty Removal of the identifiable bias does not correct for all of the potential errors that result from a computer-based shoreline mapping methodology. This type of analysis has inherent uncertainties that result from the resolution of the imagery and the registration of disparate data. Offsets in the data that result from the registration model introduce a greater uncertainty in the identification of changes in shoreline position than they do in the calculation of areal changes. Changes in shoreline position measured at a point contain the greatest uncertainty because they include not only the registration error (X-or Y -RMS, Table 5) but the errors associated with the mis-classification of a pixel at the land/water interface ( 20 m, the pixel resolution). Evaluating the changes identified over a reach of shoreline reduces this uncertainty because not all of the pixels at the land/water interface are incorrectly classified. The longer the reach, the greater the reduction. Assuming a normal distribution of mis-classified pixels, the maximum uncertainty over the perimeter of an island will be no greater than 112 the pixel resolution, or 10m. The maximum uncertainty of the area calculations is identified by integrating this 10m uncertainty over the entire shoreline and adding the product of the RMS errors from the registration model. These RMS errors were limited to approximately 1/2 the pixel resolution (Table 5) so their contribution to the uncertainty of the area calculations to less than 0.01 ha (100m2) (Table 14). An average beach slope of 3 was the best approximation from the data available to remove the systematic bias. Recognizing the spatial and temporal variability of the beach slope, altering the average value by 1 significantly changes the bias A beach slope of 2 results in a maximum Shoreline Change and Systematic Bias 0.5 times greater than the measurement used. Conversely, a beach slope of 4 yields values 0 .25 times less than the value used

PAGE 69

57 Table 14: The Maximum Uncertainty of the Area Calculations for Each Island. lntegrated1 Registration Maximum Island Perimeter Uncertainty Uncertainty Uncertainty (m) (ha) (ha) (ha) Dauphin Island 11640 .00 11.6400 0 0028 11 6428 Petit Bois Island 33760.00 33 7600 0.0016 33 7616 Small Islands 4000 00 4 0000 0 0016 4 0016 Horn Island 70160 00 70 1600 0.0121 70. 1721 East Sbip I s land 17960 00 17.9600 0 0032 17.9631 West Ship Island 15560 00 15.5600 0.0032 15.5631 Cat Island 63200. 00 63.2000 0 0041 63.2041 1 Calculated by multiplying the Perimeter of the island by 10m then converting to hectares

PAGE 70

58 RESULTS Rounding and registration errors may have been incorporated during the digitization of the SPOT control points, however, if these errors are assumed constant throughout, the relative UTM position of any two points in the imagery should be constant. A point-by-point evaluation of several identifiable features in the resultant image did show some variability of the UTM coordinates from those obtained by directly digitizing the same points from the USGS Quadrangle Maps These offsets proved to be constant throughout and were well below the 20 m tolerance maintained by the USGS when the quadrangle maps were compiled The accuracy of the registration models was evaluated by selecting points from each data set and computing the merge parameters. The UTM coordinates for all points identified within Ship, Horn, Petit Bois, and Dauphin Islands were the same, however, Cat Island did show some possible registration errors. A few of the points chosen on Cat Island did not register in the north-south direction. The maximum o ffset recorded for any set of three control points was 1.41241 pixels (28. 25 m) Most of the combinations selected did register however, suggesting that the suspect points were the result of poor identification Atmospheric backscatter did effect the DNs of the CAMS imagery. In channel! the digital values were elevated by approximately 24 count values at the extremes of the swath while in channel2 the DNs were enhanced by an average of 16 counts. Fortunatley the geometry of the scan and the orientation of the islands positioned the elevated DNs over the water In keeping with historical accounting methodologies, the discussion of changes to these islands will be consistent with the dominant direction of sediment transport, the islands will be discussed from east to west.

PAGE 71

59 Dauphin Island The coverage of the SPOT imagery (Figure 22) limits the identification of change along the margins of Dauphin Island, Alabama The changes identified from the albedo den ved shorelines of western Dauphin Island between 1987 and 1991 are illustrated in Figure 24. The most apparent change is the westward extension of the island by 69.0 25.96 m. The Sound margin shows a uniform pattern of erosion ( -11.12 25.96 m), while the Gulf margin indicates alternating areas of accretion and erosion with a net gain of approximately 28.98 14 80 m when integrated over the entire portion of the shoreline studied. These changes may represent an offset in the registration of the data. Simply shifting the CAMS image one pixel to the north, however, does not account for the variability of the changes along the Gulf margin nor the apparent areal gain of 9 01 11.64 ha. Petit Bois Island Migration of Petit Bois Island to the west appears to have been arrested by dredging the Pascagoula Shipping Channel, however the effects of littoral drift continue to dominate the evolution of this island (Figure 25). Th e lateral offset of the eastern terminus of this island was estimated as 73 .01 26 84 m to the w est over the four year period of investigation This rate of 18.75 6.71 m yrl is considerably less than the rates of99. 01 m yrl and 89.90 m yrl determined by Waller and Malbrough (1976) and Byrnes et al. (1991), respectively (Table 15) Despite the dominance of the longshore processes on the geomorphology of Petit Bois Island, the effects of cross-shore processes are apparent near the center of th e island where overwash and/or aeolian processes interrupt the aforementioned trend. Here the island has very little relief and very little vegetation to stabilize the sediment The erosion along the Gulf margin is m i rrored by accretion along the Sound margin Additional evidence for such cross-shore processes is the uniform erosional trend

PAGE 72

t::.;;::,:J Land in I 987 1991 Sh o r e line Dauphin Island y s 0 lr. Kil ometers Map P roj.-.: ti o n UTM Z<'nt 1 6 ------------Figure 24 : Change Image for the Western Terminus of Dauphin Island Alabama.

PAGE 73

Petit Bois Island v y La d 1987 "":=:=:::=;::, n m l 0 -1991 Shoreline Kilometers Map Projteh o n UTM 1 6 Figure 25: Change Image for Petit Bois Island, Mississippi. 0'\ -

PAGE 74

62 identified along the western half of the Sound facing shoreline. The total retreat of this reach of shoreline is estimated at 26.99 13.08 m. Otvos (1979) indicated that higher energy longshore currents transport sediment along the Gulf beaches than along the Sound beaches. The differential accretionary patterns identified along the margins of this island may substantiate this theory. The accretionary trend along the Gulf beaches appears to be a uniform progradation at a rate of 6.75 3.07 m yr1, while deposition along the Sound beaches is localized immediately west of the areas of erosion These localized rates of progradation range from 4 25 3.07 m yr1 to 11.75 3.07 m yr1. The small islands immediately to the west of Petit Bois Island have undergone considerable change. The entire Gulf facing shoreline retreated at a rate of 23.36 3.07 m yr 1 The western terminus of these islands is a northwest prograding spit that increased in length by 166 .64 26.84 mover the four year period. At the eastern terminus, a retreat rate of 18.34 6. 71 m yr 1 resulted in the creation of a north-south oriented spit Hom Island The magnitude and direction of general shoreline movement along the margins of Horn Island are not consistent with those documented for Petit Bois Island nor with the historical accounts of change reported for this island. The eastern tip of the island accreted to the northeast by approximately 246.0 m or at a rate of 61.5 7.17 m yr1, while the western tip of the island prograded to the northwest by approximately 86 0 28.68 m, yielding an overall lateral growth rate of 83 0 7.17 m yr1. The changes identified along the Sound facing shoreline consist of intermittent areas of erosion alternating with areas of accretion (Figure 26). The prominent areas (or highs) along the Sound shoreline have eroded at the same rate the depressions (or lows) have been filled resulting in no net change to the shoreline position. Along the Gulf shoreline however, widespread erosion has affected considerable change in shoreline

PAGE 75

Hom Island .. L d 1987 t.:::<::;:;::J an In 1991 Shoreline 0 Figure 26: Change Image for Hom Island, Mississippi. . $ J/ 4 Kilomc:ters Map P ro_j:lio n UTM U.n( 1 6 0\ w

PAGE 76

64 position. Along the eastern half of the island, the rate of shoreline retreat decreases in a westward direction from 28.5 5.99 m yr-1 to 6.0 5.99 m yr1. Similarly, the western half of the island shows erosional rate which accelerate toward the west from 0.0 5.99 m yr1 to 6 0 5.99 m yrl. A total retreat of the Gulf shoreline was estimated at 59.01 23 .96m. Ship Island In 1969, Ship Island was breached as a result of Hurricane Camille Camille Cut presently separates East Ship Island from West Ship Island The changes identified along the margins of both Ship Island barriers indicate that these segments respond differently to incident coastal processes. A discussion of the changes identified along the margin of Ship Island as a whole, would therefore, contain confusing evidence of the dominant process which controls the evolution of the island The general trend of historical coastal evolution reported in Byrnes et al. (1991) indicated that East Ship Island is retreating toward the Sound and West Ship Island is prograding to the west and south. The fmdings of this study concur (Figure 27; Table 15) East Ship Island showed a uniform retreat toward the Sound at a rate of 1.05 3 63 m yr1. Similarly, western half of West Ship Island migrated to the west and south at rates of 16.37 6.80 m yr-1 and 8.19 6.63 m yr1 respectively. Considerable erosion to the Gulf shoreline along the eastern half of West Ship Island did however, offset this progradation resulting in an estimated growth rate of 0.06 3.63 m yr 1 along the entire shoreline. Lateral migration of West Ship Island is not only evidenced by the similar offshore bar morphology to Petit Bois Island but by the 115.54 27.20 m retreat of th e eastern terminus of the island coupled with the 65.46 22.2 m of progradation on the western tip The net losses integrated over the Gulf and Sound margins offsets this

PAGE 77

West Ship 1::':::::::1 Land in 1987 -1991 Shoreline Ship Island Figure 27: Change Image for Ship Island, Mississippi. 0 East Ship . s r r. KiiClmeters M a p lJfM 16 0\ 1.1\

PAGE 78

Table 15: Rates of Change Along Selected Margins of the Mississippi Sound Barrier Island Complex. A vg. Rate of Change A vg Rate of Change A vg. Rate of Change Net Change Author Time Name of the Island Gulf Shoreline East End West End of Island Area (yrs) (mlyr) (mlyr) (m/yr) (%) no variation posted no variation posted no variation posted Waller and Malbrough, 1976 124 Petit Bois Island -0.85 -99.01 36.23 -24.0 Horn Island -0.60 -36.29 42.68 -7.0 Ship Island -3.00 -13.46 9.31 -33.1 Cat Island -2.40 -19.29 5 02 -22.0 no variation posted n o variation posted no variation posted Shabica et al., 1984 23 Petit Bois Island -0.80 nd (no data) nd (no data) nd (no data) Hom Island 0.30 nd nd nd West Ship Island 0.60 nd nd nd East Ship Island -6.40 nd nd nd Cat Island -2.50 nd nd nd all values 2 1 m/yr all values 2.1 m/yr all values 2.1 m/yr Byrnes et al., 1991 138 Petit Bois Island -2.50 -89.90 31.30 -34.0 Hom Island 0.00 -39.30 34.50 -15 0 Ship Island -2.90 -7.50 9 .60 38.0 Cat Island -2 4 -2 4 no data -29.0 This Study 4 Petit Bois Island 6.75 3.07 -18.25 6.71 1.75 6.71 5.40 Small Islands -23 .36 3.07 18 .34 6.71 41.66 6.71 -6. 37 Hom Island 17 .50.99 61.50.17 21.50 7.17 -3 .00 West Ship Island 0.06.36 -28 64 6.80 16 .37 6 .80 -2.76 East Ship Island -1.05 3.36 61.46 6 .80 11.45 6.80 0 .61 Cat Island -1.40 4.02 -3.91 6 68 -28.91 6.68 2 17 W Tip Dauphin Island no data no data 17.25 6.49 6.41 ( +) progradation (+)accretion ( + ) accretion (-)retreat ()erosion (-)erosion

PAGE 79

increase in island tract and produces a net loss of 6.34 ha (2.76%) of this island's are (Table 15). 67 The changes identified in the geomorphology of the shoreline of East Ship Island show less evidence of westward migration being the dominant transport process. A net retreat of 1.04 3.36 m yr-1 along the Sound margin was reported despite the accretional trend identified along this shoreface west of Northwest Bluff. The eastern tip of the island migrated into Dog Keys Pass by 245.83 27 .20 m while the western tip advanced as much as 205.83 27.20 m to the west. Despite this substantial addition of sand to the termini of this island, the net accretion recorded was equal to 0.90 ha or 0.61 %. Cat Island Cat Island responds differently to nearshore processes than the other islands. The dominant longshore transport processes reported to have a substantial effect the other island (Waller and Malbrough, 1976; Otvos, 1979; Shabica et al., 1984; Byrnes et al., 1991) are relatively ineffective along the margins of Cat Island Cross-shore processes dominate the changes recorded. Figure 28 illustrates that significant retreat was localized along three segments of the shoreline. The most substantial loss was recorded along the Gulf margin of the northern half of the northeast-southwest oriented beach-ridge complex. This southwest retreat averaged approximately 65.63 16 08 mover the four year period of record. Along the Sound margin of this spit, average rates of retreat to the east were calculated at 3.91 4.02 m yr1. This value reflects the increased rate of 13.91 4.02 m yr 1 identified along localized reaches of this shoreface. Additional losses were recorded at the western end of the island where easterly and northerly retreat were identified. Approximately 1.5 km along the southern shore of the relict, east-west beach-ridge complex shows increasing erosion toward the western terminus of the island (West Point) Retreat rates at the western tip of the island were recorded at 28.91 6.68 m yr-1 to the east. Accretion along this shoreline, on the other

PAGE 80

West Point Land in 1987 -1991 Shoreline Cat Island South Spit Figure 28: Change Image for Cat Island, Mississippi. 0 Ncrth Point N s If.' K i lometers M a p UTM 16 0'1 00

PAGE 81

hand, is confined to the areas in the lee of the southern spit and Negro Point Rates of 6.09 4.02 m yrl were identified in these protected areas. 69 Progradation appears to be confmed to the southern tip of the northeast-southwest Gulf margin where growth rates of 18 75 6.52 m yr-1 toward the southwest were observed. Tidal flushing and the southerly diffraction of the dominantly westward flowing longshore current may account for this change.

PAGE 82

70 DISCUSSION The most dynamic features in Mississippi Sound and the adjacent areas are the barrier islands and the tidal passes. Historical shoreline monitoring demonstrates that erosion is an important natural process along the Gulf and Sound shorelines of the islands The major factors affecting the erosional trend of the islands are the deficiency in sediment supply, frequency and impact of hurricanes, and sea level changes (Waller and Malbrough, 1976; Otvos, 1979a; Shabica et al., 1984; Knowles, 1989 ; Byrnes et al., 1991). Changes identified from November 6, 1987, to November 1, 1991, showed that contrary to the fmdings previously reported (Waller and Malbrough, 1976; Otvos, 1979; Shabica et al., 1984; Byrnes et al., 1991), no dominant direction of migration was recognizable for all of the islands. The rates of change calculated along selected margins of these islands for this study and the studies conducted by Waller and Malbrough (1976), Shabica et al. (1984), and Byrnes et al. (1991) have been summarized in Table 15 Satellite imagery provides additional evidence of the westward migration of sediment that historical analyses do not Due to the clarity of the water in the region of study, submerged bedfonns were identified using the green waveband of visible light (XSl and Channel2 in the SPOT and CAMS imagery, respectively). North-south striking sandwaves were identified slightly offshore, along the Sound margin of all of the east-west oriented islands (Ship, Hom, Petit Bois, and Dauphin). The orientation and distribution of these linear to slightly cuspate sand waves indicate that longshore transport of sediment is occurring within the Sound. Otvos (1979) indicated that the transport of sediment along the Gulf beaches occurs in a higher energy environment than along the Sound beaches. The absents of these sand waves in the tidal passes and offshore along the Gulf margin may substantiate this theory. Offshore along the Gulf margin of all of the islands, a series of echelon bars were identified by mapping the breaker line(s). In general, the bars are attached to the islands

PAGE 83

Figure 29: Photograph of West Ship Island showing the Subaqueous Sedimentary Features. .....) ......

PAGE 84

72 in the east and strike increasingly seaward to the west The orientation of the Gulf shoreline is directly related to the bar/trough configuration and its distance from the shoreline (Hom-rna and Sonu, 1962; Nummedal et al., 1980a; Dolan et al., 1982) which is directly influenced by the incident wave energy (Fox and Davis, 1976; Goldsmith et al., 1982). The color-infrared aerial photography collected in conjunction with the 1991 CAMS digital imagery clearly displays these features along the margins of West Ship Island (Figure 29). Kolb and Van Lopik (1958) studied the geology of the Mississippi River Plain and determined that the western Sound was subsiding faster than the eastern Sound due to the weight of the St Bernard delta lobe. The subsidence rates posted ranged from 0.3048 em yr 1 to 0 6096 em yr-1. Subsidence, however, is not the only process that controls local changes in the shoreline position. Byrnes et al. (1991) and Penland et al. (1987. 1989) indicated that tide guage data collected from 1895 to 1983 were used to calculate rates of relative sea level rise for this region that ranged from 0 15 em yrl to 0.2 em yrl. Based upon the maximum rate posted (0.2 em yrl).local sea level would have increased by 0.8 em over the 4-year period of this study. Dividing this total sea level rise by the tangent of 3 (the beach slope) would result in an average shoreline retreat of 0.1526 m. The cha_nge in area produced exclusively by relative sea level rise (Rei. Change) was quantified for each island (Table 16) Correction for the relative change in sea level did not significantly alter the trends established for each island after removal of the systematic bias (Tables 13 and 16). Regardless of the correction removal of the systematic bias and/or the correction for changes in relative sea level rise, the changes in area calculated for all of the islands were within the uncertainty of the measurements using these methods. Not even the changes in island area identified over longer periods of time in the historical analyses (Table 15) can be resolved using these methods. Data with a higher spatial resolution will reduce the

PAGE 85

73 uncertainty of this methodology and enable changes of this magnitude to be accurately determined. Table 16 : Net Overall Change to the Barrier Islands After Accounting for Changes in Local Sea Level. Total Change Total Change Rei Change Net Change Net Change Island Name (ha) (%) (ha) (ha) (%) Cat Island 19.26 2.17 0.96 20.22 2 .28 Ship Island (Total) -5. 44 -1.44 0.51 -4.93 -1.30 West Ship -6.34 -2 76 0 24 -6 10 -2 66 East Ship 0.90 0 .61 0.27 1.17 0.79 Horn Island -40 .39 -3.00 1.07 -39.32 -2.92 Small Islands -1.54 -6.37 0 06 -1.48 -6 .13 Petit Bois Island 25. 06 5.40 0 .52 25.58 5 52 W. Tip Dauphin Island 9.01 6.41 0.18 9 19 6 53 Calculations by other researchers that include the changes in the small islands immediately west of Petit Bois Island in the changes posted for Petit Bois Island are biased. The effects of littoral drift continue to dominate the evolution of Petit Bois Island, however the westward migration of the island appears to be arrested by the Pascagoula Shipping Channel. This channel is both wide and deep enough to inhibit the westward transport of the coarser-grained sand fractions. Sediment inputs to the small islands from the east are confined to the fmer-grained sands which are easily reactivated during high energy conditions such as winter storm events The combined effects of these processes would result in migration of these islands to the north-northwest, as was observed in this study There was a dramatic loss of sediment ( -6 37 %) recorded for the small islands despite the apparent excess of sediment being supplied to Petit Bois less than 1 km to the east. The lack of vegetation to stabilize these islands increases the significance of changes caused by incident wave, tidal, and aeolian transport processes. The magnitude

PAGE 86

74 of these cross-shore changes are more representative of the changes identified at the termini of the other islands (Table 15). Regardless of the cause, significant changes in the sediment transport processes of the Sound and adjacent near-shore areas are occurring in a very localized area. The magnitude and direction of general shoreline movement along the margins of Hom Island are not consistent with those documented in the historical accounts of change reported for this island nor with the regional trend inferred from this analysis (Figure 26 : Table 15). This phenomenon is probably an artifact of the registration model. Factors that contributed to the uncertainty of the model for this island were; the length of the island, the lack of good spectral contrast within the island, and the concentration of identifiable control points. The first attempt to register the data for this island was deemed unacceptable. Although additional control points were added to improve the model used, the elevated retreat and accretion rates identified over long reaches of the shoreline indicate that greater control is still required. Ship Island was breached as a result of Hurricane Camille in 1969. Camille Cut presently separates East Ship Island from West Ship Island. The changes identified along the margins of both Ship Island barriers indicate that these segments respond differently to incident coastal processes The general trend of historical coastal evolution reported in Byrnes et al (1991) indicated that East Ship Island is retreating toward the Sound and West Ship Island is prograding to the west and south. The findings of this study concur (Figure 27; Table 15). Recent sedimentological studies of the coastal depositional environments of Louisiana have shown that the cumulative effects associated with winter cold front processes are an important mechanism for local sediment dispersal. Cold fronts are of lower energy than hurricanes but, their unifonn directions of approach, repeated pattern of wind changes, large spatial scales, and higher frequency of occurrence (30-40 each season) allow them to drive greater cumulative change (Van Heerden, 1980; Kemp, 1986;

PAGE 87

75 Huh et al., 1991). Although winter cold fronts have occurred throughout the 4-year period of this study, no significant net change in island area was determined using these methods Only localized changes in shoreline position measured primarily at the east and west ends of the islands were significant (Table 15). These winter cold fronts may affect changes to Cat Island that are different than those identified along the margins of the other islands due to its proximity to the mainland and its unique shape Cat Island responds differently to nearshore processes than the other islands because the longshore transport processes that dominate the changes along the margins of the other island are relatively ineffective along the margins of Cat Island (Waller and Malbrough, 1976; Otvos, 1979; Shabica et al., 1984; Byrnes et al., 1991). The eastern terminus of this island is a northeast-southwest oriented beach ridge complex that has an offshore bar morphology similar to the one identified along the Gulf margin of the other islands (Figure 30) Lateral migration of this feature constitutes cross-shore changes not lateral displacement The only significant cross-shore changes recorded were for the other islands were along the Gulf margins of. Horn, Petit Bois, and the small islands immediately west of Petit Bois. The majority of the historical cross-shore change rates shown in Table 15 are within the uncertainty of this analysis. The only rate posted that would be identifiable by these methods is an average retreat rate of 6.04 m yr 1 along the Gulf margin of East Ship Island (Shabica et al., 1984). Conversely, all of the average migration rates posted for the termini of the east-west islands can be resolved using these methods, despite the greater uncertainty in these measurements. Ancillary data such as rectified aerial photography, beach pro flies, and Global Positioning System (GPS) control points would provide better information to assess the changes which occurred along the margins of these islands between November 6, 1987 and November 1, 1991. Similar improvements in identifying and quantifying change

PAGE 88

Figure 30: Photograph lllustrating the Subaqueous Sedimer

PAGE 89

76 dimentary Features Along the Margins of Cat Island, Mississippi.

PAGE 90

could be made through the use of a single data type with higher spatial resolution and a greater frequency of collection 77

PAGE 91

78 CONCLUSIONS Areal changes in the Mississippi Sound barrier islands that were identified in this study cannot be resolved within the uncertainty of the methods. Changes in shoreline position, however, can be quantified and mapped using the remotely sensed CAMS and SPOT data. Despite the level of pre-processing, the initial manipulation of the data should be based upon a model designed to remove the geometric distortions Simultaneous projection of one image to a known Earth coordinate system during the georeferencing process serves two purposes It enhances the precision at which change can be quantified and reduces the cumulative error of data registration by establishing a digital basemap that the second image can be remapped to. The most effective (accurate) method for mapping change is through the registration of a single island at a time. This methodology results in a better defined, more tightly controlled model because the interpolation and/or extrapolation required between the areas of rigid control are limited or eliminated. Similarly, the greater the number of control points that can be identified within an island the better the registration. Although temporal variability over the duration of this study can not be directly detennined, spatial analyses provide insights into the regional trends of shoreline dynamics in response to incident wave processes. The most consistent trend is the westward movement of the islands in response to the longshore transport of sand. This is evidenced by the significant displacement of the shoreline along the ends of the islands (Table 15; Figures 24-28) and the orientation and distribution of the submerged bedfonns (Figures 29 and 30). The magnitude of the changes and the erosional and depositional patterns identified indicate that higher energy processes affect the Gulf margin more than the margins of the Sound The difference in the shape and shoreline orientation along the margins of Cat Island result in changes which are anomalous to these trends. Large areas of the shoreline

PAGE 92

79 are protected from incident wave processes. In these areas, marsh expansion and/or shoreline accretion may exceed the losses resulting from subsidence and eustatic sea level rise. Conversely, along the unprotected reaches of the shoreline significant losses were recorded. The retreat identified along most of the Gulf shoreline and at the western terminus of the island indicate that the processes which dominate the changes along the margins of this island are highly localized. Progradation was limited to the southern end of the northeast-southwest oriented beach-ridge complex where diffraction of the westward longshore transport of sand toward the south may have resulted in deposition. Localized erosion along the southern margin of the relict east-west beach-ridge complex and the presence of the slightly cuspate, north-south oriented submerged sandwaves suggest that the dominant northwest propagating waves are re-establishing a westward flowing littoral current immediately west of the protected, low energy environments in the lee of Negro Point and South Spit (Figure 30). The westward increasing rate of erosion and size of the submerged sand waves further suggests that the western tenninus of this island has become the sediment source for the shoals and islands to the west

PAGE 93

80 REFERENCES Adams, C.E., Jr., Wells, J.T. and Coleman, J M 1982 Sediment Transport on the Central Louisiana Continental Shelf: Implications for the developing Atdcfuaflalaya River Delta. Contrib. Marine Science 25, p 133-148 Ahem, F.J., Brown, R J., Cihlar, J., Gauthier, R., Murphy, J Neville, A., and Teillet, P.M., 1987. Radiometric correction of visible and infrared remote sensing data at the Canada Centre for Remote Sensing. Int. J Remote Sensing, 8:9, p 13491376. April, G.C., Raney, D C and Jarrell, J.P., 1980. Hydrodynamics of Mobile Bay and Mississippi Sound-Pass Exchange Study. Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Publication #MASGP-80-023. Atwell, B H and Thomann, G C., 1973. Mississippi Sound Remote Sensing Study. Remote Sensing and Water Resources Management Proceedings 17, p.57-88. Barfus, B.L. 1984. Lithologic and seismic determination and correlation of Recent depositional environments in western Mississippi Sound. Master's Thesis, University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi. 109p Bault, E.I., 1972. Hydrology of Alabama Estuarine Areas-Cooperative Gulf of Mexico Estuarine Inventory. Alabama Marine Resource Bulletin 7, 25p. Beverley, A M. and Penton, P.O., 1989. ELAS User's Reference, Volume II. Science and Technology Laboratory, John C. Stennis SPace Center, MS. Billingsley, F.C., 1984. Remote sensing for monetoring vegetation: an emphases on satellites in : (G M. Woodwell, editor), The Role of Terrestrial Vegetation in the Global Carbon Cycle : Measurements by Remote Sensing Wiley, New York. p 161 180. Boone, P.A., 1973. Depositional Systems of the Alabama Mississippi and Western Florida Coastal Zone. Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc. 23, p.226-277. Brown, G.F., et. al., 1944 Geology and ground-water resources of the coastal area in Mississippi. Mississippi Bureau of Geology Bulletin 60. 232p. Brunton, G D 1984. Modem and Ancient Sedimentary Processes and Response within the Alabama Linear Barrier Coastal System Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Publication #MASGP-80-015, 205p. Byrnes, M R., McBride, R A., Penland, S., Hiland, M.W. and Westphal, K.A., 1991. Historical Changes in Shoreline Position along the Mississippi Sound Barrier Islands Programs and Abstracts of the 12th Annual Research Conference of the GCSSEPM Foundation, p. 43-55 Clemence, S.P. and Barr, D J., 1979 Aerial imagery for mapping morphological changes and surficial soils in the lower Mississippi River valley. Assoc. Eng. Geol. Bulletin 16 : 4, p 449-465

PAGE 94

CNES., 1985. Spot to direct receiving station interface document Technical Report #S IF-0/E-10-CN, Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales. 81 Cousma, B., Drago, M., Piccazzo, M., Scarponi, G., and Tucci, S., 1979. Heavy Metals in Ligurian Sea Sediments: Distribution of Cr, Cu, Ni, and Mn in Surficial Sediments. Marine Chemistry 8, p. 125-142. Curray, J.R. and Moore, D.G ., 1963. Facies delineation by acoustic reflection; northern Gulf of Mexico. Sedimentology 2:130-148. Diner, D.J., Martonchik, J.V., Danielson, E.D and Bruegge, C.J 1989. Atmospheric correction of high resolution land surface images. In Proceedings of IGARSS'89, p. 860-863. Dixon, C.B 1990. A story of heavy mineral accumulation within the low-energy environments of Horn Island, Mississippi Gulf Coast Master's Thesis, University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi. Dolan, R., Hayden, B .P. and Shabica, S.V 1982. Beach morphology and inshore bathymetry of Horn Island, Mississippi. Journal of Geology 90:5, p 529-544. Drummond, S.E., 1976. Distribution of heavy minerals; offshore Alabama and Mississippi: Master's Thesis, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 90p. Eleuterius, C.K., 1974. Mississippi Superport Study-Environmental Assessment. Office of Science and Technology, Office of the Governor, State of MS. 248p. Eleuterius, C.K., 1975. Oceanography of the Mississippi coastal area in: (lrby, et. al. editors), Guide to the Marine Resources of Mississippi. Fox Printing Co., Hattiesburg, Mississippi. p. 20-32 Eleuterius, C K., 1976. Delineation of the Tidal Current Regime of Mississippi Sound. Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Publication #MASGP-Q-76 001. 1p. Eleuterius, C.K., 1978a. Classification of Mississippi Sound as to Estuary Hydrological Type. Gulf Res Rep. 6:2, 185-187 Eleuterius, C.K 1978b. Geographical Definition of Mississippi Sound Gulf Res Rep 6:2, p. 179-181. Eleuterius, C K., 1979 Hydrology of Mississippi Sound north of Petit Bois Pass Mississippi Marine Research Council, Ocean Springs, Mississippi. 54p. Eleuterius, C.K and Beaugez, S L., 1979. Mississippi Sound A hydrogaphic and Climate Atlas. Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Publication #MASGP-79-009. 135p. Emplaincourt, J.L.G. and Wielchowsky, C C., 1974 Detection of Shoreline Changes form ERTS-1 Data. South ea stern Geographer 14:1, p. 38-45. Fairbridge, R.W 1958. Dating the latest movements of the Quaternary sea level. Trans. N.Y. Acadamy of Science, Series 2, v. 20:6, p. 471-482.

PAGE 95

82 Fox, W.T. and Davis, R.A., Jr., 1976 Weather Patterns and Coastal Changes. in : (R.A Davis and R.L Ethington editors), Beach and Near-shore Sedimentation SEPM Special Publication 24, p 23 Foxworth, R.D, Pritty, R.R., Johnson, W B. and Moore, W.S., 1962. Heavy minerals of sand from Recent beaches of the Gulf coast of Mississippi and associated islands Mississippi Bureau of Geology Bulletin 93. 92p Gazzier, C.A., Frederking R.L. and Minshew, V.H 1980 Mapping coastal wetlands of Mississippi with remote sensing. Remote Sensing of the Earth's Resources Conference 7, p. 187-198 Gazzier C A. and Pellegrin, F.J. 1978. Pleistocene shorelines and paleogeographic features, Mississippi Gulf Coast [abstr.]: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 62:9, p 1757-1758 Geoscience Inc 1983. A report of the collection and analysis of sediment and water samples Pascagoula Harbor and Mississippi Sound : US Army Corps of Engineers Contract No DACWOl 83-C-0027. 77p Gillispie, A.R., 1980. Digital techniques of Image enhancement in : (B. S Siegal and A R. Gillispie, ed i tors), Remote Sen s ing in Geology Wiley, New York. p. 139-226. Glezen W.H., 1951. Changes in the barrier bars of Mississippi Sound recorded on maps and charts from 1710 to 1948. Unpublished Memorandum: Gulf Research and Development Co. 8p. Goldsmith, V., Bowman, D. and Kiley, K., 1982. Sequential Stage Development of Crescentric Bars : HaHoterim Beach, southeastern Mediteranean Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 52, p. 233-249 Goldstein, A. Jr. 1942. Sedimentary P e trologic Provinces of the Northern Gulf of Mexico. Journal of Sedim e ntary Petrology 12 : 2, p. 77-84 Griffm, G M and Parrott, B.S 1964. Development of clay mineral zones during deltaic migration AAPG Bulletin 48 : 1, pp. 57 69. Hardin, J.D. Sapp, C.D., Emplaincourt, J L and Richter, K.E ., 1976. Shoreline and bathymetric changes in the coastal area of Alabama, a remote-sensing approach Alabama Geologi c al Survey Information Series 50. 125p Hardin, J.D ., 1978. Shoreline changes in the Coastal area of Alabama Master's Thesis University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa Alabama 82p Hector, Stanley (editor) ., 1978. Summary of Proceedings of an Experimental Dredge Disposal Workshop for Mississippi Sound. Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium, Ocean Springs Miss i ssippi. 43p. Hom-rna, M. and Sonu C 1962. Rhythmic Pattern of Longsho r e Bars related to Sedinment Characteristics. in : Proceedings of the 8th Coastal Engineering Conference, Hamburg American Society of Civil Engineers 47p

PAGE 96

Hoskin C M., 1971. Sedimentation in StLouis Bay, Mississippi. Mississippi State University Water Resour. Res Inst., Mississippi State, Mississippi. 22p 83 Hoyt, J.H 1967. Barrier Island Formation. Geological Society of America Bulletin 78, p. 1125-1136. Hoyt J .H., 1970. Development of Barrier Islands, Northern Gulf of Mexico Geological Society of America Bulletin 81, p. 3779-3782 Hsu, K J 1960. Texture and Mineralogy of the Recent Sands of the Gulf Coast Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 30:3, p. 380-403. Huh, O.K., Roberts, H.H., Rouse, L.J. and Rickman, D.A., 1991. Fine Grained Transport and Deposition in the Atchafalaya and Chenier Plain Sedimentary System Proceedings of Coastal Sediments 1991, p. 817-830. Isphording, W.C., 1985. Sedimentation, dispersal, and partitioning of trace metals in coastal Mississippi-Alabama estuarine sediments: Final Technical Report, MASGP-83-035, Grant No. NA81AA D-00050, 76p Isphording, W.C., Stringfellow, J.A. and Flowers, G.C., 1985. Sedimentary and Geochemical Systems in Transitional Marine Sediments in the Northeastern Gulf of Mexico. Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc. 35, p. 397-407. Isphording, W C. and Lamb, G.M 1980. The Sediments of Eastern Mississippi Sound: A report for the Alabama Coastal Area Board. Dauphin Island Sea Laboratory Technical Report #80-003 15p. Isphording, W.C., Otvost, E. and Bowen, R.L., 1981. Neogene Geology of Southeastern Mississippi and Southwestern Alabama. Southern Geological Survey Publication 2, p. 1A-1-1B-20. Jensen, R.E., 1983. Mississippi Sound Wave-Hindcast Study. Technical Report HL-838, US Army Engineering Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. Kauffman, D.S. and Robertson, B.C., 1989. Improved classification using imagery from multiple satellites. In Proceedings of IGARSS'89, p 642-644. Kauffman, Y J., 1988. Atmospheric effect on spectral signature-Measurements and Corrections. IEEE Transactions on Goescience and Remote Sensing 26:4, p. 441 450. Kemp, G.P., 1986. Mud Deposition at the Shoreface : wave and sediment-dynamics on the Chenier Plain of Louisiana. Ph.D. Dissertation, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 146p. Knowles, S J., 1989 Analysis of barrier island dynamics for ship channel planning at Ship Island, Mississippi. in: (D.K Stauble and O T Magoon editors), Barrier Islands: Process and Management: Proceedings of Coastal Zone 89, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, NY, p. 238-252. Kolb, C.R. and Van Lopik, J.R., 1958. Geology of the Mississippi River deltaic plain. U.S. Army Corps Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Technical report #3, p 3-12.

PAGE 97

Kusaka, T Egawa, H. and Kawata, Y., 1989. Classification of SPOT Image using spectral and spatial features of primitive regions with nearly uniform color. In Proceedings of IGARSS'89, p. 649-652. 84 Kwon, H J., 1969. Barrier Islands of the Northern Gulf of Mexico: Sediment source and development. Louisiana State University Coastal Studies Series 25, p.51. Lamb, G.M. 1972. Distribution of Holocene Foraminifera in Mobile Bay and the Effect of Salinity Changes. Alabama Geological Society Circular #82, 12p. Lamb, G M 1983 Offshore vs inshore; where is the coastline and what is it made of? in: Nearshore Sedimentology (W.F. Tanner, editor), Proceedings of the Symposium on Coastal Sedimentology 6, p 143-159. Lammons, T.L., 1982. Clay petrology and distribution of bottom sediments in Lake Borgue, Louisiana, North-central Gulf of Mexico. Master's Thesis. University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi. Lanigan, D.M., 1979. A heavy metal study of Mississippi Sound and Petit Bois Island. Master's Thesis, University of New Orleans, New Orleans, Louisiana. Lucas, W.C., 1975. Geology of the Mississippi Gulf Coast: in: (lrby, et. al. editors), Guide to the Marine Resources of Mississippi. Fox Printing Co., Hattiesburg, Mississippi. p. 33-58. Ludwick, J.C., 1964 Sediments in Northeastern Gulf of Mexico in: (R.L. Miller, editor). Papers in Marine Geology. MacMillan Co., New York, p. 204-238. Lytle, J.S. and Lytle, T.F., 1980. Pollutant Transport in Mississippi Sound, Interim Technical report II. Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Publication #MASGP-80-028. 13p. May, E.B., 1971. Holocene sediments of Mobile Bay, Alabama. Alabama Marine Research Bulletin, 11, p. 1-25. Marceau, D., Howarth, P.J. and Dubois, J.M 1989. Automated texture extraction from high spatial resolution satellite imagery for land-cover classification: Concepts and Applications. In Proceedings of IGARSS'89, p. 2765-2768. McAuliffe, L.E., 1980. Geomorphology and sedimentology of a Pleistocene Delta and Barrier-Ridge system, coastal Mississippi. Master's Thesis. University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi. McCarty, J.E., 1973. The distribution and relationship between copper, lead and zinc in an oyster reef and its peripheral sediments in St Louis Bay, Mississippi: Master s Thesis University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, Mississippi. McGarry, G., 1987. An evaluation of the effects of Hurricanes Elana and Juan along the coastline of Pinellas County, Florida 1985 using LANDSAT-TM Images. MS Thesis, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, Florida. McPhearson, R.M., 1970. The hydrography of Mobile Bay and Mississippi Sound, Alabama. J oumal of marine Sci. 1:2, p. 1-83.

PAGE 98

85 Neckel, H. and Labs, D 1981. Improved Data of Solar Spectral Irradiance from 0 33 to 1.25. Solar Physics, 74, p. 231-249. Newby, R.A 1983. Quantitative variations of clay minerals in Pearl River estuarine sediments. Master's Thesis, University of New Orleans, New Orleans, Louisiana. Ng, Samual., 1977. Sediment transportation in Mobile Bay: correlation of Remote Sensing Data with the Hydrodynamic mathematical model. Master's Thesis, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 140p. Nummedal, D., Cuomo, R.F. and Penland, S., 1984 Shoreline evolution along the northern coast of the Gulf of Mexico. Shore and Beach 52: 1, p. 11-17. Nummedal, D., Mantry, R. and Penland, S., 1980. Bar morphology along the Mississippi Sound margin. Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc. of Geol. Soc. 30, p. 465-466. Nummedal, D., Penland, S. and Gerdes, R., 1980. Geologic response to hurricane impact on low-profile Gulf Coast barriers. Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc of Geol. Soc. 30, p 183-194. O'Brien, P.A., 1980. The Geochemistry of Trace Metals in the Bottom Sediments of Mississippi Sound. Master's Thesis, University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi. 67p. Otterman, J., 1980. Atmospheric effect on radiometric imaging from satellites under low optical thickness conditions Remote Sensing the Environment 9, p. 115-129. Otvos, E.G. Jr., 1970a. Development and migration of barrier islands Northern Gulf of Mexico. Geological Society of America Bulletin 81:1, p. 241-246. Otvos, E.G. Jr., 1970b. Development and migration of barrier islands Northern Gulf of Mexico: Reply. Geological Society of America Bulletin 81:12, p. 3783-3788. Otvos, E.G. Jr., 1973. Geology of the Mississippi-Alabama coastal area and nearshore zone-Guidebook. New Orleans Geological Society Field trip, May 1973. 67p. Otvos, E.G. Jr 1976a Geological evolution and Holocene development of the Mississippi-Alabama Gulf Coast. [abstr .], Journal Miss. Academy of Sci. 21, p.76. Otvos, E G. Jr. 1976b. Holocene barrier island development over pre-existing Pleistocene high ground : Dauphin Island, Alabama. [abstr.], Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs 8:2, p. 239 240. Otvos, E.G. Jr., 1977 Post-Miocene geological development of the Mississippi-Alabama Coastal Zone. Journal of Miss. Academy of Sci. 21, p 101-114. Otvos, E.G. Jr 1978. New Orleans-South Hancock Holocene Barrier Trends and Origin of Lake Pontchartrain. Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc. 28, p. 337-355 Otvos, E.G. Jr., 1979. Barrier island evolution and history of migration, north central Gulf coast in: (S.P. Leatherman, editor) Barrier Islands from the Gulf of St. Lawrence to the Gulf of Mexico. Academic Press, New York, N.Y. pp. 27-46.

PAGE 99

Otvos, E.G. Jr., 1981a Post-Miocene units, Mississippi-Alabama coast; a brief outline in: Field trip guidebook for southern Mississippi. Southern Geological Soc. of America Publication No 2, p. 1b 1-1b .9. Otvos, E.G. Jr. 1981b. Barrier island formation through nearshore aggradation: stratigraphic and field evidence Marine Geology 43:3-4, p. 195-243. 86 Otvos, E.G. Jr., 1982a Guidebook: Geology of the Mississippi-Alabama coastal area and nearshore zone. New Orleans Geological Society, New Orleans, LA. pp. 27-46. Otvos, E G Jr. 1982b. Post-Miocene geological development of the Mississippi Alabama coastal zone. Mississippi Acadamy of Science Journal, v. 40, p 101112. Otvos, E.G. Jr 1982c. Coastal Geology of Mississippi, Alabama and adjacent Louisiana areas. New Orleans Geological Society 60p. Paulson, O .L., Gras, C.M., Hovanesian, J.C. and Tarbutton, R.J. 1974. Dredge spoils in Mississippi Sound. University of Mississippi, Hattiesburg, Mississippi. 48p. Pellegrin, F.J. 1978. Late Pleistocene-Holocene depositional systems, southern Hancock County, Mississippi: Master's Thesis, Univ of Mississippi, University, Mississippi. 98p. Penland, S., Nummedal,D. and Schramm, W.E., 1980 Hurricane Impact at Dauphin Island, Alabama. Proceedings of Coastal Zone '80, American Society of Civil Engineers, New York NY, p. 1425-1449. Penland, S ., 1984 Process-response models for Gulf Coast barrier island breaching. Trans Gulf Coast Assoc of Geol. Soc. 34 p 397-400 Penland, S Debusschere, K., Westphal, K A., Suter, J.R., McBride, R.A. and Reimer, P.D 1985. The 1985 Hurricane Impacts on the Isles Demieres, Louisiana : a temporal and spatial analysis of the coastal geomorphic changes Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc. 39, p. 455-470. Penland, S Ramsey, K. and McBride, R A., 1987 Relative sea level rise and subsidence measurements in the Gulf of Mexico based on National ocean survey tide gage records. Proceedings of the 1Oth National Conference of the Coastal Society, p 661-676. Penland, S., Ramsey, K., McBride, R.A., Maslow, T.F., and Westphal, K.A., 1989. Relative sea level rise and subsidence in Louisiana and the Gulf of Mexico Coastal Geology technical Report 3. 65p. Penland, S. and Ramsey, K., 1989. Relative sea-level rise in Louisiana and the Gulf of Mexico : 1908-1988. Journal of Coastal Research, 6:2, p. 323-342 Price, J., 1987. Radiometric Calibration of Satellite Sensors in the Visible and Near Infrared: History and Outlook. Remote Sensing of the Environment, 22: 1, p. 3-9

PAGE 100

Price. R.C., 1977. Lithologic differentiation by use of remote sensing in Tuscaloosa County, Alabama: Master's Thesis, Univ. of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. Priddy, R.R. Crisler, R. Jr. Sebren, C P., Powell, J.D and Burford, H., 1955. Sediments of Mississippi Sound and inshore waters. Mississippi Bureau of Geology Bulletin 82. 54p. 87 Rainwater, E.H., 1964. Late Pleistocene and Recent history of Mississippi Sound between Beauvior and Ship Island. Mississippi Geological Survey Bulletin 102, p. 32-61. Reynolds, W.R. and Thompson, D A., 1976 Occurrence and Distribution of Clay Minerals and those metals in the Bottom Sediments of Biloxi Bay, MS. Water Resources Institute, Mississippi State University, Oxford, MS. 41p. Roberts, H.H., Adams, R.D. and Cunningham, R.H.W., 1980. Evolution of the Sand dominated subaerial phase, Atchafalaya Delta, Louisiana. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 64, p. 264-279. Robertson, B.C and Sharpe,B 1989. Integrated atmospheric correction of multispectral satellite imagery In Proceedings of IGARSS'89, p. 893-896. Robertson, B.C. and Teillet, P.M., 1989. Integrated atmospheric correction of multispectral satellite imagery In IGARSS Proceedings, IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing. Robinson, I.S., 1985. Satellite Oceanography. Ellis Horwood, Chinester. Rouse. L.J., Roberts, H.H. and Cunningham, R.H W., 1978. Satellite Observation of the Subaerial growth of the Atchafalaya Delta, Louisiana. Geology 6, p. 405-408 Rucker, J.B. and Swoden, J.O., 1988. Recent Morphological Changes at Dog Keys Pass, Mississippi: the formation and disappearance of the Isle of Caprice Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc. 38, p. 343-349 Sapp, C.D., 1975. Remote measurement of shoreline changes in coastal Alabama. NASA Tech. Memo. #X-58168 V. 11-B. Sapp, C.D., Emplaincourt, I.G and Hardin, J.D., 1975. Remote Sensing of shoreline dynamics Mobile Bay area 1900-1975. Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc. 25, p 153-165. Shabica, S.V., Dolan, R. and May, S.K., 1984. Shoreline erosion rates along barrier islands of the north central Gulf of Mexico. Environmental Geology 5:3, p.115126. Scholl, D.W., 1964. Recent sedimentary record in mangrove swamps and rise in sea level over the southwestern coast of Florida; Part 1. Marine Geology, 2, p. 344-366. Scholl, D.W. 1965. Recent sedimentary record in mangrove swamps and rise in sea level over the southwestern coast of Florida; Part 1. Marine Geology, 2, p. 343-364

PAGE 101

Scholl, D.W. and Stuiver, M., 1967. Recent Submergence of Southern Florida: a comparison with adjacent coasts and othe Eustatic data. Geologic Society of America Bulletin, 78, p. 437-454. Shepard, F P., 1954. Nomenclature based on the Sand-Silt -Clay Ratios Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 24. p. 151-158 Simonson, D N., 1983. Heavy mineral and grain size analysis of sublittoral sands adjacent to Mississippi barrier islands. Master's Thesis, University of Southern Mississippi. Slater, P.N. 1980. Remote Sensing-Optics and Optical Systems. Anderson Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts; London. 88 Smith, W. Everett., 1989. Mississippi Sound north shoreline changes in Alabama, 19551985. Alabama Geologic Survey Information Series 67. 34p. Spencer, J.A., 1982. The effect of hurricanes on sediment accumulation ; Graveline Bay, Mississippi. Master's Thesis, University of New Orleans, New Orleans, Louisiana. 152p. Stephenson, L.W., Cooke, C.W and Lowe, E.N., 1933. Coastal plain stratigraphy of Mississippi. Mississippi Bureau of Geology Bulletin 25 125p Stow, S.H., Drummond, S.E. and Haynes, C.D., 1976. Occurrence and distribution of heavy minerals, offshore Alabama and Mississippi. AIME, Trans. 260:1, p. 7577. Taylor, D., 1979. The effects of discharge from three industrialized estuaries on the distribution of heavy metals in the coastal sediments of the North Sea. in: Estuaries and Coastal Marine Sciences, 8, p. 387-393. Teillet, P.M 1986 Image correction for radiometric effects in remote sensing. Int J. Remote Sensing 7:12, p. 1637-1651. Titus, J.G. (editor) 1987 Greenhouse effect, sea level rise and coastal wetlands. US EPA, Washington, DC. 152p. Todd, T.W. 1968. Dynamic diversion, influence of longshore current-tidal flow interaction on Chenier and barrier island plains. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 38:3, p. 734-7 46 Tucker, C.J., 1979. Red and photographic infrared linear combinations for monetoring vegetation. Remote Sensing of Environm e nts, 8:2, p 127-150. Tucker, C.J 1980 Remote sensing of leaf water content in the near infrared. Remote Sensing of Environments 10, p. 23-32. Turner, R.E., Malila, W A., Nalepka, R.F., and Thompson, F J., 1975 Influence of atmosphere on remotely sensed data. in: Proceedings, Society of Photo-optical Instrumentation Engineers 51, p 101-109.

PAGE 102

89 Upshaw, C.F., Creath, W B. and Brooks, F.L., 1966. Sediments and microfauna off the coast of Mississippi and adjacent states. Mississippi Bureau of Geology Bulletin 106. 127p. US Army Corps of Engineers., 1967. Hurricane survey of the Mississippi coast US 90th Congress, 1st Session, House Document 99. 92p. US Army Corps of Engineers., 1970. Report on Hurricane Camille, 14-22 August 1969. US Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District, Mobile, Alabama, SOp. US Army Corps of Engineers., 1973. Regional Report, South Atlantic-Gulf region, Puerto-Rico and the Virgin Islands. in: Regional inventory Report, Vol. 3, National Shoreline Study. US 93rd Congress, Washington, DC. p. 93-121. US Army Corps of Engineers., 1978. Economic proftle of the Mississippi Sound study area. US Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District, Mobile, Alabama. US Army Corps of Engineers., 1979. Reconnaissance Report, Mississippi Sound and adjacent areas dredged material disposal study (stage 1), Appendix A US Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District, Mobile, Alabama. US Army Corps of Engineers., 1982. Benthic Study of Mississippi Sound. US Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District, Mobile, Alabama. (Benthic invertebrates, conducted by Barry A Vittor and Assoc.) US Army Corps of Engineers., 1984. Mississippi Sound and Adjacent Areas Dredged Material Disposal Study. Feasability Report Volumes I, II, & m. US Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District, Mobile, Alabama. Van Andel, T.H., 1960. Sources and deposition of Holocene sediments: Northern Gulf of Mexico. in: (Shepard, F.P Phleger, F.B. and Van Andel, T.H. editors), Recent Sediments Northwest Gulf of Mexico. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Oklahoma, p. 34-55 Van Andel, T.H. and Curray, J.R., 1960. Regional aspects of Modem sedimentation in Northern Gulf of Mexico and similar basins, and paleographic significance. in: (Shepard, F.P., Phleger, F B. and Van Andel, T.H. editors), Recent Sediments Northwest Gulf of Mexico. American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Tulsa, Oklahoma, p. 345-364. Van Heerden, L L., 1989. Sedimentary Responses During Flood and Non flood Conditions, new Atchafalaya Delta, Louisiana, Master's Thesis, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 75 p. Vittor, B A., 1975. Characterization of users of Remotely Sensed Data in the Alabama coastal zone Marine Environmental Science Consortium, Dauphin Island, Alabama. Report#NASA-CR-144058. 116p. Waller, T.H. and Malbrough, L.P., 1976. Temporal changes in the offshore islands of Mississippi. Mississippi State University Water Resources lnsl, Mississippi State University. 109p. Weidie, A.E., 1968 Bay and barrier sands. Trans. Gulf Coast Assoc. Geol. Soc. 18, p. 405-415.

PAGE 103

90 Wilson, A.M 1984. Response modeling of Holocene sediments within the shallow substrate of central Mississippi Sound. Master's Thesis, University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi. 89p Wilson, A and Iseri, K. T., 1967 River Discharge to the Sea from the Shores of the Conterminous United States, Alaska and Puerto Rico U.S Geological Society Hydrologic Inventory Atlas HA-282 Wimberly, W.J., 1985. Heavy minerals of the Recent sands, south of the Mississippi Sound barrier islands. Master's Thesis. University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi. Yeargan, M E., 1980. Remote sensing, sedimentation and vegetation distribution within the coastal wetlands, Eastern StLouis Bay, Mississipp i. Master's Thesis University of Mississippi, University, Mississippi.

PAGE 104

91 APPENDIX A Monthly and Annual Wind Direction and Intensity for the Central Gulf Coast

PAGE 105

92 JAHUAJlY WIND SPEED (PERCENT OF TIM!) SPEID (JtNTS) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 -DIR. M 1.0 2.3 4.6 3 3 6 1 .o NMB 8 2.1 3.6 2.2 .s 1 NE 7 1.7 2 9 1.0 .2 1 ENI 7 1.6 1.9 .4 .o I .6 1.4 2 4 6 0 ESI .4 .9 2.9 1.7 .1 Sl .3 1. 0 2.8 1.6 .2 SSI .4 1.5 3.0 1.4 1 .o s .7 2.1 3.2 1.2 1 .o ssw .4 1.5 2 6 1.0 .l .o sw .3 1.1 1.5 .3 l WSW .2 .s 1.0 4 .1 o w 4 7 .9 3 .o WNW .3 .6 1.0 .5 .2 .o o NW .6 1.0 1.3 9 ._l NNW .5 1.1 2.3 1.3 .4 .1 o CALM Total Cala % 11.2 8.2 21.1 38.0 us.l 3 0 5 .o 1 N

PAGE 106

93 F!BRUAllY WIND SPEED (PERCENT OF TIM!) SPEED (KNTS) l-3 4-6 7-10 ll-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-SS >56 -DIR. N r 2.3 4.4 2.3 6 I NNE .8 2.0 4.4 '1.5 3 1 NE .8 1.9 2.7 5 .0 .0 ENE 5 1.6 2 1 .li 0 .o E 5 1.3 1.9 6 l .o ESE .3 .9 2.2 1.9 .2 .o SE 3 1.0 2.5 1.4 .1 0 SSE .4 1.7 4.1 1.4 2 o s 6 2.0 4.8 1.3 1 .o .o ssw .5 1.6 3.2 1.2 1 .0 .o sw .4 1.0 1.8 1.0 l WSW .2 .8 1.0 6 1 .o w 3 .8 1.0 3 .o .o WNW .2 7 1.1 6 .1 0 0 NW .4 7 1.2 8 .2 .o NNW .4 1.1 1.5 T.-z .4 .1 .o CALM Total Cala -y 7.4 21.4 40.2 17.2 2.8 .4 .o N

PAGE 107

94 MARCH WIND SPEED (PERCENT OF TIME) SPEED (KNTS) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 -D lR. N 1.0 2.1 3.8 1.8 4 .o .0 7 2 1 3. 7 1.4 2 o NE 7 1.5 2.0 4 .0 .o ENE 5 1.1 1.7 3 0 E 5 1.1 1.7 7 1 .0 ESE 3 1.1 3 3 1.7 2 .o SE 4 1.1 3 9 2.1 1 .o SSE .4 1.8 5 3 2.4 3 1 s 6 2.3 4. 7 1.8 2 o ssw 3 1.2 3.3 1.6 2 .0 0 sw 2 .9 1.9 .-a- 1 .o WSW 1 6 1.0 5 1 .0 w 3 7 9 .4 1 .o WNW 2 .6 1.1 7 2 .o NW 4 .8 1.4 7 2 .0 NNW 5 1.2 1.8 1.1 5 2 .0 CALM Total Calm % 9. 5 7.4 20.1 41.5 18.2 2 8 5 o N

PAGE 108

95 APillL WIND SP!!D (PERCENT OP TIME) SP!!D (KNrS) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 DIB N .8 1.6 2.b 1.1 .2 .o NN! .9 1.6 2.7 8 .2 .1 .0 ME .9 1.2 1.5 .3 .0 EN! .6 1.2 1.3 2 .0 E .5 .9 .7+ .0 ESE .3 1.0 3.0 2.-y .2 .0 .0 S! .4 1.4 4.4 2.9 2 .o SSE 7 2.1 6 3 -3.1 .2 .1 o s 5 7 0 2.9 .1 1 ssw .4 1.5 4.3 2.6 .2 .o o sw J I 2 2 !.T .1 o WSW .2 .b 1.3 .1 .o w .3 .7 1.0 .J .0 WNW .4 .7 1.1 .5 .1 NW .4 .8 .9 .5 .0 .o NNW .4 1.0 1.8 8 1 o CALK Total Cal -x 7. 7 8.0 19.4 42.5 20.1 1.9 .4 .o N

PAGE 109

96 MAY WIND SPEED (PERCENT OF TIME) SPEED (KNTS) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 -DIR. N 1.1 1.-s1.-1 .6 1 NNE 1.1 1.6 1.8 3 .0 NE 1.2 1.7 1.3 2 .0 ENE .6 .8 9 1 E 3 6 8 3 .0 ESE .2 6 1.8 1.2 1 SE .4 1.0 3.4 2 1 .1 0 SSE 7 2.2 6.5 3 6 3 1 s 7 2.9 7.7 2.8 .4 0 0 ssw .4 1.9 5.9 2.3 1 .0 SW .4 1. 4 3.1 1.0 1 WSW .4 1.0 1.4 .4 .0 .0 w .6 1.1 1.0 2 .0 WNW 5 9 1.0 3 .o .o NW 6 9 8 .1 .0 NNW 7 1.1 1.3 .4 1 .0 CALM Total Callll % 11.1 9 9 21. 7 40.2 15.8 1.3 .1 .o I N w J 100 IU,.CT 1 0.0 ll"CCtCVfT rJI U C I .... .,

PAGE 110

97 JUHI WIND SPEED (PERCENT OF TIHI) SPEED (KNTS) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 -DIR. N 1.6 1.9 1.4 .2 .o NNE 1.3 1.9 1.4 .2 .o .0 N! 1.1 2.0 1.1 1 ._()_ ENE 7 1.5 1.0 1 .o ._()_ E .5 1.0 8 2 .o ESE .3 7 1.2 .6 .0 .0 .o SE .3 .9 2.2 .6 1 .0 SSE .5 2.2 5.6 1.7 .2 .o s .8 3.2 7.7 1.6 .1 .o ssw .5 2 2 6.4 2.3 .2 .o sw 7 1.8 3.8 1.3 .1 .o WSW .5 1.3 1.9 .5 o .o w 1.0 1.6 1.1 .2 WNW 7 1.3 1.3 2 .0 .o NW 9 1.1 7 1 .o NNW 7 1.1 7 .1 .o CALM Total Cala % 12.5 12-4 25. 7 38. 2 10.5 .8 .1 ._()_ 1 I N

PAGE 111

98 JULY WINO SPEED (PERCENT OF TIME) SPEED (KNTS) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 -DIR. N 1.9 2.3 1.0 1 0 .o NNE 1.3 2.2 1.3 2 .0 NE 1.3 1.8 9 1 .0 ENE 8 1.3 8 .1 .0 .0 E 6 1.1 .6 1 ESE .3 .6 1.0 .4 .o SE .4 .9 1.6 .0 .o SSE 5 1.5 3 6 7 .0 s .9 3 5 5 7 9 1 ssw .6 2.3 5.5 1.5 1 0 sw 6 1.8 3.8 1.3 .1 0 WSW 5 1.4 2.0 7 1 o w 1.2 2.9 2.1 3 0 WNW 7 1.8 1.7 3 0 NW 1.1 2 0 9 1 .0 NNW 1.1 1.2 .8 1 .0 CALM Total Cala % 16.5 14.( 2 8.8 33.0 7 1 .6 .o N ..0 OlltCCfiON ll'f:llt:[Jif 0' fiiCI

PAGE 112

99 AUGOST WIND SPEED (PEiCEHT OF TIM!) SPEED 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 -Dli. H 2 5_ 3.0 1.7 .2 .0 NNE 1.7 2.7 1.8 .0 .0 N! 1.7 2.7 1.9 .1 0 EN! 7 1.7 1.6 .J .0 0 7 1.3 1.0 .2 0 ESE .3 7 1.0 .2 o SE .4 1.0 1.7 .5 .0 .0 SSE 4 1.7 3 0 .6 1 0 .o s 1.0 3.1 4.7 1.0 .0 .ssw 6 1.9 4. 7 1.3 1 0 sw 5 1.4 3.1 .9 .o WSW .4 1.3 1.4 .3 .o .0 w 1.1 2.0 1.4 2 .o WNW 8 1. 4 1.3 3 o NW 1.0 1.4 1.1 1 .0 NNW 1.0 1. 4 J O .2 o 0 CALK Total Cala 1 14. a 28.8 32.5 6.6 4 0 o 0 o I N

PAGE 113

100 SEPTEMBER WIND SPEED (PERCENT OF TIME) SPEED (KNTS) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 -DIR. N 2.1 3.8 3 1 9 1 0 NNE 1.4 3.6 4.9 1.5 2 .o 0 o NE 1.5 4.5 4.8 1.2 2 .0 .o .0 .o ENE 7 2.2 J.) 1.1 .1 0 0 .a E 7 1.8 2.6 8 .0 .a .o ESE .2 .9 1.8 8 1 .a o SE .3 1.2 2.3 l.a 1 .a o .a SSE .5 1.5 3.2 1.1 1 0 .0 s .8 2.5 3.9 1.0 1 0 0 ssw .3 1.1 2.6 .8 .a .a 0 .o sw .5 7 1.2 4 .a WSW 2 .3 .b 2 .0 0 w .4 7 4 1 .o .0 WNW 3 5 .4 1 0 NW 7 .9 7 1 .o .0 .a NNW 6 1.1 1.1 .4 1 .0 .0 CALM Total Cal11l -y 11.4 11. 27.2 37. 1 11.4 1.2 3 1 o o .0 N WII'CI OIIICCTIOIO "'UICUIT Olf TIIICI ""'''--

PAGE 114

101 OCTOI!I. WIND SPEED (PERCENT OF TIM!) SPeED (KNTS) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 43-55 >56 -DIR N 2.2 4.2 4 9 1.8 3 0 .o NNE 1.6 4.0 4.4 1.1 .1 1 0 NE 1.7 3.9 4.2 7 1 ENE 7 1.9 2.6 8 1 .o E .8 1.7 2.4 8 1 ESE .3 .8 1. 8 l.T 1 .0 SE .4 1.0 2.0 7 .0 .o SSE .6 1.4 2 5 1.1 1 o s 8 2.0 2 6 .6 1 o .0 SSW 3 1.2 1.7 .5 .o .o sw .3 .8 1.0 3 .o WSW .2 4 .5 2 .o w 3 .6 .6 2 .o WNW 3 .5 9 .2 .0 NW .5 1.3 1.2 :4 0 NNW .8 1.4 1.8 .8 2 .0 CALK Total Cala --x TJ. 6 11.9 26. 9 34.9 11.2 1.2 2 .1 I I 1 N OCT OM: It

PAGE 115

102 NOVEMBER WIND SPEED (PERCENT OF TIME) SPEED (KNTS) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 -DIR. N 2.2 3.2 4.9 2.7 5 .o NNE 1.8 2.8 3.9 1.9 3 0 NE 1.4 2. 7 3.0 6 1 1 0 ENE 8 1.8 2 3 .4 0 E 9 1.8 2.0 5 0 ESE .4 1.1 2.4 1.1 .0 SE .3 9 2.5 1.3 .o SSE 5 1.2 2 6 1.1 1 0 s 6 1.8 2 3 7 1 ssw .4 1.2 1.9 .6 .1 .0 sw 3 7 1.3 6 .o WSW 2 4 7 .4 o .o w 5 .8 7 2 .0 WNW .4 ,6 0 4 1 .o NW .8 1.0 1.4 7 1 .0 .0 NNW 1.0 1.1 2.0 1.4 4 1 CALM Total Calm % 12.0 12.5 23.3 35. 1 14.8 2 0 3 .0 N

PAGE 116

103 DECEMBER WIND SPEED (PERCENT OF TIME) SPEED (KNTS) 1-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 -DlR. N 1.9 2.7 4.3 2.6 7 1 .0 NNE 1.4 2 6 3.9 1.9 6 0 NE 1.4 2 3 3.0 8 1 .0 ENE 9 1.5 2.5 6 .0 E 7 1.9 2.5 7 1 ESE .4 1.2 2 6 1.2 1 SE .5 1.1 2.5 9 1 SSE 5 1.4 2.3 8 1 s 9 1.6 2 7 7 1 0 ssw 5 1.1 2.0 7 1 sw .4 9 1.5 3 .0 0 WSW 2 6 8 .3 1 w 6 7 l.O .4 .1 WNW .4 7 1.0 .4 2 .0 w 5 .8 1.3 7 2 .0 NNW 6 1.2 1.9 1.3 ._l .0 .o CALM Total Calm % 12.8 11. 22.3 35.7 14.( 2.6 3 .0 N WlOOCI O l M:CTIOoo UPCC"T 01 TliiCI

PAGE 117

104 CUMULATIVE WIND SPEED (PERCENT OF TIME) SPEED (KNTS) l-3 4-6 7-10 11-16 17-21 22-27 28-33 34-40 41-47 48-55 >56 -DlR. H 9 2. 1 4.2 2 .---o 5 1 .o NNE 9 2 3 4 4 2:4 5 2 0 NE 1.0 2.1 3.0 1.2 2 1 .o ENE 7 1.6 2. 7 9 1 .0 0 0 E 5 1.5 2.9 1.2 2 .0 .0 ESE 3 .9 3.5 2.6 .4 1 .0 SE 4 1.0 3.3 2.2 .4 .0 SSE .4 1.3 3 9 2.6 5 1 .o s 5 1.4 3.3 1.8 3 1 .0 ssw 3 .8 2.0 1.4 2 .o .0 .0 sw .2 .6 1.3 6 1 0 WSW 1 .5 9 .4 .1 .0 w 3 7 1.0 3 1 .0 WNW 2 .5 .8 4 .2 .0 .o NW 3 5 9 7 .2 .o NNW 4 7 1.5 1.2 4 .1 .o .o CALM Total Calm % 6. 6 7.2 18.6 39.7 22.5 4.4 9 .2 o .0 N JIIO CIJMCTJIIIO II"CJICIPIT OJ' fJICI

PAGE 118

APPENDIXB Spectral Response Curves for the CAMS Sensor (from NASA's STI., October 1, 1991) 105

PAGE 119

106 8 0 UJ Vl z 0 60 c. IX UJ > 40 UJ 20 O A O 0 .435 0.460 0 .485 0 510 0 535 WAVELENGTH ( MICRONS) CHANNEL1 WAVELENGTH INTENSITY 0.410 0 0.415 0 0.420 0 0 425 0 0 430 0 0 435 1 0 44 0 3 0.445 7 0.450 18 0.455 35 0.460 56 0.465 66 0.470 73 0 475 79 0.480 83 0 485 88 0.490 92 0.495 93 0 .500 97 -0 .505 100 0 .510 99 0 .515 86 0 .520 53 0 525 12 0 530 3 0 535 2 0 .540 1 0 .545 1

PAGE 120

107 80 l.ll VI z 0 60 c.. VI l.ll c::: ;.:J > 1= < ...J -tO l.ll 2 0 0.490 0.515 0.540 0.565 0. 590 0.61 5 WAVELENGTH (MICRONS ) CHANNEL2 WAVELENGTH INTENSITY 0.490 0 0 495 0 0 500 1 0 505 1 I 0 510 4 0.515 19 I 0 520 47 0 525 79 0.530 87 0 535 91 0.540 92 0 545 95 0 550 97 0.555 97 0 .560 100 0 565 99 0.570 99 0.575 98 0 580 96 0 585 93 0 .59 0 89 0.595 67 0 600 32 0 605 5 0 610 3 I 0 615 3 I i 0 620 4 I 0.62 5 3 0.630 3

PAGE 121

108 8 0 t!.l Vl z 0 60 c.. Vl t!.l t!.l > ...l 40 t!.l 20 O.SiO 0.595 0 6 2 0 0 .64 5 W AVELE NGTH (M ICRONS) CHANNEL3 WAVELENGTH INTENS I TY I 0 570 0 0 575 a -. .. .. 0.580 1 0 .585 1 0 590 8 0.595 36 0 600 72 0 605 100 0 .610 100 0 .615 99 0 .620 88 0.625 59 0 630 24 0 635 3 0.640 1 0 .645 1 0.650 1

PAGE 122

109 80 t..:J Vl z 0 60 e; t..:J c::: w > E= <; 40 w c::: :!0 0 0 600 0.625 0. 650 0.675 0.700 0.725 0.750 WAVELENGTH ( MICRONS) CHANNEL4 WAV E LENG TH INTENSITY 0.600 0 0.605 0 0.610 1 0 615 2 0 620 11 0.625 41 0 630 76 0 635 98 0 640 100 0 645 99 0 650 98 0.655 97 0 660 93 0 665 88 0 670 81 0.675 80 0 680 72 0 685 55 0.690 44 0 695 45 0.700 48 0.705 52 0.7 1 0 54 0 715 50 0 720 42 0 725 40 0 730 42 0.735 35 0 740 20 0.745 10 0 750 8 0.755 8 0 760 7 0 765 6 o .no 6

PAGE 123

110 80 UJ C/l z 0 60 Q.. U) t!.l UJ > 1= <( -l 40 t!.l 20 0.675 0.700 0.725 0 .750 0.775 WAVELENGTH (MICRONS) 0 .800 0 .825 CHANNELS WAVELENGTH INTENSITY 0.650 0 0 655 o 0 660 0 I 0 665 0 0 670 0 O.ti75 1 0 680 10 0 685 34 0.690 54 0 695 58 0.700 54 I 0 705 51 0 710 49 0 715 52 I 0.720 58 0.725 61 I 0 730 64 0 .735 73 I 0 740 91 I I 0.745 100 0 750 96 0.755 88 I 0 760 83 I 0.765 84 I o.no 83 o.ns 80 0 .780 79 0 785 82 0 790 86 0 795 86 0 800 75 0.805 48 0 810 14 0 815 6 0 820 5 0.825 7 0 830 8

PAGE 124

80 UJ Vl z 9 60 Vi t..:.J 0::: t..:.J > t..:.J 0::: ::o 0.1::0 0.770 0.795 0.820 0.845 0.87 0 0.895 0.920 0.945 WAVELENGTH ( MICRONS) CHANNELS WAVELENGTH INTENSITY WAVELENGTH INTENSITY I 0 720 0 0 880 96 I 0.725 0 0 885 94 0 730 0 0 .890 84 0 735 0 0.895 . 70 I 0 740 0 I 0.900 60 i 0.745 1 \ 0 905 59 I 0 .75 0 7 0 910 59 I i 0 755 1 4 0.915 57 I 0 760 17 0.920 54 I 0.765 17 0.925 so I o .no 16 0.930 44 I 0.77 5 17 0.935 36 i 0.780 18 0.940 27 0.785 17 0.945 16 0 790 17 I 0.950 8 i 0 795 16 0.955 5 I 0 .800 27 0 960 4 i 0 805 56 0.965 2 I 0 810 91 I 0 815 100 I 0 820 100 0.825 97 I 0 830 95 0 835 92 I I 0.840 90 I i 0 845 89 I I 0 .850 87 0 .855 90 I 0 860 95 i 0.865 96 I I 0870 96 I I 0.875 96 I 111

PAGE 125

80 l.ll (/) z 0 60 e; l.ll e::: l.ll > i= :5 40 l.ll -:.:: 20 uo 1.50 1.60 1.70 WAVELENGTH (M ICRONS) CHANNEL? WAV ELENGTH INTENSITY 1.40 1.42 1 .44 1.46 1 48 1.50 1.52 1.54 1.56 1.58 1 60 1.62 1 64 1.66 1.68 1 .70 1 .72 1 .74 1.76 1.78 1.80 0 0 1 2 4 9 25 54 92 100 92 81 74 67 59 49 36 15 3 1 0 112 1.80

PAGE 126

80 t..:J Vl z 0 6 0 c... t3 0:: t..:J > f= < ...J .\0 t..:J ::o 1.96 2.06 2.16 2 26 WAVELENGTH ( MICRONS) CHANNELS W A VELENGTH INTENSITY 1 .96 1 .98 2 00 2.02 2 .04 2.06 2 08 2 10 2 12 2.14 2 16 2.18 2 .20 2 .22 2.2 4 2.26 2 .28 2 30 2 32 2.34 2.3 6 0 1 4 18 55 97 100 98 92 85 86 90 89 81 79 7 6 69 69 50 11 1 113 2 .36

PAGE 127

114 80 UJ rzl z 0 60 c... rzl UJ c:::: UJ > E= 40 < --l UJ c:: 20 9.60 10. 00 10.40 I 0.80 11.20 11.60 12.00 12.40 WAVELENGTH (MICRONS) CHANNEL 9 WAVELENGTH INTENSITY 9 60 0 9.68 0 9 .76 0 9.84 1 9.92 1 10.00 2 I 10.08 4 10.16 15 10.24 43 10 .32 50 10.40 53 10.48 67 10.56 76 10.64 81 10 72 87 10.80 83 10.88 81 10.96 80 11.04 82 11.12 87 11.20 87 11.28 97 11.36 93 I 11.44 100 11.52 99 I 11. 60 85 I 11. 68 84 11.76 78 I 11.84 66 11.92 65 12.00 61 12 .08 50 12.16 36 12 .24 23 12.32 14 12.40 7 12.48 3 12.56 1

PAGE 128

115 APPENDIXC Flow Charts Outlining the ELAS Processing Proceedure and the Modules Employed

PAGE 129

Raw SPOT Data D igitizer "cpts" f ile SPOT-1 a 4 9 "grif" file .... _____ 10 Gee referenced and Projected (UTM) SPOT-1 b Gee referenced (Lat/Long Grid) SPOT-1 a Flow Chart of the SPOT Processing Meth ods using ELAS. 116

PAGE 130

I I Georeferenced (Lat/Long Grid) CAMS-1b (10m) 11 b Georeferenced ( Lat/Long Grid) CAMS-1 b (20m) 1 Ill-Flight Line 1 2 7 "grif" file 8 9 Georeferenced &lld Projected (UTM) CAMS-1 a 10m 11a Georeferenced and Projected (UTM) CAMS-1 a (20m) Flow Chart of the CAMS Processing Methods using ELAS. 117

PAGE 131

Geo re fe re need and Projected (UTM) CAMS1 a: SPOT-1 b "\ Gee referenced (Lat/Long Grid) SPOT-1a: CAMS-1b "\ 4 5 Island 1 4 2 ncptsn file 7; 10 Island 2 3 4 ngrif11 file Island 1 ...Registered (UTM) Island 1 (20m) Island 2 J 118 Aow Chart Outlining the Registration Procedure for SPOT and CAMS Data using ELAS.

PAGE 132

Georeferenced Cl"ld Projected (UTM) CAMS1 a SPOT1 b Registered (UTM) Island 1 Merge Parameters (20m) Island 2 I Rotation and Translation required to merge the Registered Image into the Georeferenced and Projected Image Flow Chart Outlining the Proceedure for Verifying the Registration Model. 119

PAGE 133

Georeferenced (UTM) SPOT-1 b; CAMS-1 a t (20m) Cat lslands-1 a 120 Registered (UTM) (20m) Images Flow Chart Outlining the Creation of a Change Image.

PAGE 134

121 APPENDIXD Outline of the SPOT Satellite Imagery Processing Levels

PAGE 135

Outline of SPOT Data Processing Levels Level lA data: 1. detector radiometric equalization 2. multispectral scenes have 3000 pixels along each of 3000 scanlines per spectral band. Level lB data: 1. detector radiometric equalization 2. bulk geometric processing to remove Earth rotation effects. 3. Resampling across track to remove off-Nadir viewing effects. 4. Resampling of the image data to 20 meter pixel resolution. Level 2 data: 1. detector radiometric equalization. 2. precision geometric processing using ground control points for registration with a known map projection Level S data: 1. Same radiometric corr e ctions as Level 1 B 2. Geometric resampling for registration with another referenced SPOT sc e ne a) Level Sl when referenced to a Level lB. b) Level S2 when referenced to a Level2. 122

PAGE 136

123 APPENDIXE Ground Control Points used to Georeference the SPOT Satellite Images

PAGE 137

I Image Pointl Element Line Longitude Latitude USGS Quadrangle Map Description I Level1A 1 226 685 -88.7251 30.6157 Vancleave, MS road-road intersection Level1A 2 582 677 -88.6521 30.6057 Vancleave MS roadroad intersection Leve11A 3 268 780 -88.7211 30.5977 Vancleave MS road-road intersection Level1A 4 297 909 88.7213 30.5739 Vancleave MS road-road intersection Level1A 5 362 1107 -88.7181 30. 5370 Vancleave, MS road-road intersection Level1A 6 467 1122 -88.6973 30.5311 Vancleave, MS road road intersection Level1A 7 679 1106 -88.6531 30.5269 Vancleave, MS road-power line cut Level1A 8 469 818 -88. 6820 30.5845 Vancleave, MS road-road intersection Level1A 9 616 1154 -88. 6686 30.5207 Vancleave, MS road power line cut Level1A 10 475 1370 -88.7076 30.4873 Gautier North, MS road road intersection Level1A 11 519 1503 -88. 6930 30. 4606 Gautier North, MS road-road intersection Level1A 12 341 1586 -88. 7455 30.4536 Gautier North, MS road-road interscction Level1A 13 423 1570 -88.7281 30.4538 Gautier North, MS road-road intersection Level1A 14 412 1531 -88.7283 30.4611 Gautier North, MS road-road interscction Level1A 15 354 1548 -88.7411 30.4599 Ocean Springs, MS road-road interscction Level1A 16 334 1483 -88. 7419 30 4720 Gautier North, MS road-road intersection Leve11A 17 308 1637 -88. 7549 30.4455 Gautier North, MS road-road intcrscctioo Level1A 18 574 1677 -88.7026 30.4301 Gautier North, MS road-road intersection Level1A 19 574 1874 -88.7122 30 .3954 Gautier North, MS road-road intersection Level1A 20 835 1433 -88.6374 30.4647 Gautier North, MS road-road intersection Level1A 21 749 1635 -88.6648 30.4319 Gautier North, MS road-road intersection Level1A 22 823 1825 -88.6592 30 .3961 Gautier North, MS road-road intersection Level1A 23 829 1865 -88.6598 30.3888 Gautier North, MS road-road intersection Leve11A 24 691 1867 -S8.6882 30.3929 Gautier North, MS road-train track Level1A 25 663 2064 -S8.7034 30.3594 Gautier South, MS road-road intersection Level1A 26 691 2121 -88. 7007 30.3484 Gautier South, MS road-road intersection Level1A 27 731 2093 -88.6911 30 .3520 Gautier South, MS road-road intcrscction Level1A 28 46 1548 -88.8038 30.4695 Ocean Springs, MS road-road intcrscctioo Level1A 29 144 1529 -88.7830 30 4699 Ocean Springs, MS road-road intcrscction Level1A 30 123 1478 -88.7845 30.4794 Ocean Springs, MS road-road inteJ:Bection Level1A 31 57 1594 -88.8037 30.4611 Ocean Springs, MS road-road intcrscction Level1A 32 1041 1909 -88. 6193 30.3746 Pascagoula South, MS road-road intersection Level1A 33 1381 1291 -88.5192 30.5276 Pascagoula North, MS road-road intcrscctioo Level1A 34 1324 1926 -88.5621 30 .3625 Pascagoula South, MS road-road intersection .....

PAGE 138

Level1A 35 1341 19 26 -88 .558 7 Level1A 36 1 292 1971 88 5 7 09 Level1A 37 1565 1931 88 5132 Level1A 38 1573 1964 -88 .513 2 Level1A 39 1564 1967 88 5151 Level1A 40 1547 1934 -88.5170 Level1A 41 1623 2016 88 5057 Level1A 42 1712 2014 -88.4874 Levell A 43 1687 1866 -88 4850 Leve l l A 44 1741 1923 88 4774 Level1A 45 1495 12 88 4330 Leve11A 46 1402 82 -88 4557 LevellA 47 1261 192 -88.4896 Levell A 48 1306 80 88.4750 LevellA 49 1286 84 88.4791 LevellA 50 1248 31 -88.4842 Levell A 51 1237 11 88.4856 LevellA 52 1628 89 88 4097 Level1A 53 1534 367 88 4427 Leve l 1A 54 1527 365 -88. 4460 Leve l 1A 55 1531 370 88 4434 Level1A 56 1670 313 88.4121 LevellA 57 1659 264 -88.4120 Leve llA 58 1702 285 -88 4041 Leve l l A 59 1729 223 88 3956 LevellA 60 1742 267 88 3951 LevellA 61 1533 1113 88.4793 LevellA 62 1685 1235 88.4546 Level1A 63 1814 1252 -88.4290 LevellA 64 1764 1 474 88.4502 LevellA 65 1785 1591 88 4518 Level1A 66 1793 1636 88.4525 Level1A 67 2010 1189 88 3859 Level1A 68 1849 110 8 8 36 55 Leve l 1A 69 1665 124 8 8 34 2 4 Levell A 70 2188 52 88.293 0 ----3 0.3621 P asc ag o ul a So uth MS 30.3557 P asc agoula So uth, MS 30.3538 Pasc a goula South MS 30.3476 Pascag o ula So uth, MS 30.3474 Pascag o ul a South, MS 30.3536 P asc agoula South, MS 30.3370 P asc ag o ula South MS 30 3346 Grand Bay S o uth We st, MS 30.3614 Grand Ba y South We st, MS 30 3496 Grand Bay S o uth West, MS 30.6935 Hurley ,MS 30.6841 Hurley, MS 30.6693 Hurley, MS 30 6875 Hurley, MS 30.6874 Hurley ,MS 30. 6981 Hurley,MS 30. 7018 Hurley, MS 30.6757 Hur1ey,MS 30 6299 Hurley,MS 30.6311 Hurley ,MS 30.6293 Hurley ,MS 30 6350 Hurley MS 30 6436 Hurley ,MS 30 6338 Hurley,MS 30 6486 Hurley MS 30.6405 Hurley,MS 30 4989 Kreole AL 30 4725 Kreole AL 30 4654 Kreole AL 30.4278 Kreole ,AL 30 4064 Kreole ,AL 30.3984 Kreole AL 30 4698 Kreol e, AL 3 0 6649 30. 6585 30. 664 2 'J"anner 1\-fS road-road interse c ti o n roadroad intersecti o n road-road intersecti o n road-road intersecti o n road-rolld intersecti o n road-road intersection road-road intersection road road intersecti o n road-road intersection canal comer road-road intersecti o n road road intersecti o n road-road intersecti o n road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road road intersection road road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road road intersection road road intersecti o n road road intersection road-road intersecti o n road road intersecti on road-road intersection road road intersection road-road intersection road road intersec tio n road-road intersection road-road intersecti o n ro ad-road intersecti o n road-road intersecti o n road-road intersecti o n ...... N VI

PAGE 139

Lcvel1A 71 2314 167 Lcvel1A 72 2051 505 Lcvel1A 73 2055 535 Lcvel1A 74 2062 969 Lcvel1A 75 2233 389 Lcvel1A 76 2293 467 Lcvel1A 77 2438 559 Lcvel1A 78 2386 693 Lcvel1A 79 2423 1019 Lcvel1A 80 2731 1537 Lcvel1A 81 71 58 Lcvel1A 82 92 61 Level1A 83 118 51 Level1A 84 130 247 Lcvel1A 85 40 409 Lcvel1A 86 108 519 Lcvel1A 87 296 429 Level1A 88 503 110 Lcvel1A 89 485 508 Lcvel1A 90 1145 626 Lcvel1A 91 1220 896 Level1A 92 1208 1025 Lcvel1A 93 1429 930 Lcvel1A 94 1323 441 Lcvel1A 9S 1503 562 Level1A 96 1663 472 Lcvel1A 91 1875 788 Lcvel1A 98 1825 1022 Levcl1A 99 1980 915 Lcvcl1A 100 2501 132 Lcvcl1A 101 2863 226 Lcvcl1A 102 2953 421 Lcvcl1A 103 2828 546 Levcl1A 104 2814 715 Lcvcl1A 105 2671 929 Lcvcl1A 106 2699 1213 -88.2733 30. 6397 Tanner Williams, MS -88.3436 30.5891 StElmo,MS -88.3445 30.5837 StElmo,MS -88.3643 30.5072 StElmo,MS -88.3008 30.6035 StElmo,MS -88.2924 30.5880 StElmo,MS -88.2720 30.5597 StElmo,MS -88.2847 30.5451 StElmo,MS -88.2932 30.4867 Grand Bay, AL -88.2559 30. 3854 Grand Bay, AL -88 7258 30 7308 Easen Hill, MS -88.7217 30.7295 Easen Hill, MS -88.7162 30.7295 Easen Hill, MS -88.7230 30. 6957 Easen Hill, MS -88.7495 30. 6700 Easen Hill, MS -88.7438 30. 6379 Easen Hill MS -88.6982 30. 6582 Easen Hill, MS -88 6404 30.7079 Easen Hill MS -88.6634 30. 6385 Easen Hill, MS -88.5346 30.5967 Three Rivers, MS -88.5327 30.5468 Three Rivers, MS -88.5416 30.5245 Three Rivers MS -88.4916 30. 5341 Big Point, MS -88.4894 30.6236 Big Point, MS -88.4585 30.5967 Big Point, MS -88.4212 30.6073 Big Point, MS -88 3937 30. 5449 Big Point, MS -88.4154 30.5053 Big Point, MS -88.3813 30.5085 Big Point, MS -88 2533 30.6838 Spring Hill, MS -88.1638 30.6115 Theodore, MS -88.1548 30.5743 Theodore, MS -88.1868 30.5562 Theodore, MS -88.1981 30.5271 Theodore, MS -88.2380 30. 4944 Coden ,MS -88.2464 30. 4434 Coden ,MS -road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection "Y" in the road road-train track 90 degree road comer 90 degree road comer road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-train track road-road intersection road road intersection road-road intersection road-road intersection road-road ifltersection -N 0\

PAGE 140

Level1A 107 2835 1206 -88.2182 30 4403 Coden,MS road-road intersection Level lA 108 2914 858 -88.1847 30.4991 Coden, MS road-road intersection Level1A 109 2934 1543 88.2149 30. 3779 Coden,MS road-road intersection Level1A 110 2983 1533 -88.2045 30 .3781 Coden,MS road-road intersection Level lA 111 1793 2694 -88.5035 30 2117 Petit Bois, MS road-road intersection Level1A 112 993 2(f}7 -88.6672 30 2377 Horn Island, MS road-road intersection Level1A 113 990 2722 -88.6685 30. 2336 Hom Island, MS roadroad intersection Leve11B 1 214 2751 -89.4377 30 2529 Waveland, MS road-road intersection Level1B 2 195 2587 -89.4359 30 2826 Waveland. MS road-road interscction Level1B 3 234 2580 -89.4274 30 2964 Waveland, MS road-road intersection Level1B 4 146 2515 -89. 4433 30.2963 Waveland, MS road-road intersection Level1B 5 798 1342 -89.2686 30.4849 Vidalia, MS road-road interscction Level1B 6 726 1389 -89 2843 30.4791 Vidalia,MS road-road intersection Leve11B 7 915 1694 -89.2565 30.4186 Vidalia,MS road-road interscction Leve11B 8 606 1375 -89.3085 30 4853 Vidalia,MS road-road interscction LevellB 9 808 79 -89.2206 30 .7095 McHemy,MS road-road int.ersection LevellB 10 1000 309 -89.1894 30 6624 McHemy,MS road-road int.ersection LevellB 11 823 15 -89.2152 30 7204 McHemy,MS road-road int.ersection Level1B 12 731 63 -89.2359 30 7150 McHemy,MS road-road intersection Level1B 13 1207 1573 -89.1924 30 4314 G_ulfport NW, MS road-road interscction Level1B 14 1093 1376 -89.2087 30 4700 NW,MS road-road interscction LevellB 15 1074 1386 -89.2130 30 4690 Gulfport NW, MS road-road interscction Level1B 16 1806 1163 -89.0549 30.4857 Gulfport North, MS road-road int.ersection Leve11B 17 1926 1079 -89 0277 30 4969 Gulfport North, MS road-road interscction Level1B 18 1911 2608 -89.0855 30.:2254 Cat Island, MS canal-c:anal intersection Level1B 19 1891 2613 -89.0893 30.2249 Cat Island, MS canal comer Level1B 20 2490 1141 -88.9137 30 4034 Biloxi,MS road-road intersection Level1B 21 2341 1144 -88. 9443 30 4162 Biloxi,MS roadroad intersection Level1B 22 2538 1212 -88. 9063 30.3606 Biloxi, MS road-road intersection Level1B 23 2462 2573 -88.9716 30.2137 Ship Island, MS seawani tip of pier Level1B 24 2460 2585 -88. 9722 30 .2123 Ship Island, MS SE comer of the Fort Level1B 25 2829 2395 -88.8956 30.2286 Ship Island, MS wata"towa Level1B 26 2919 54 -88.7858 30.6473 Vestry,MS road-road intersection Level1B 27 2757 22 -88.8180 30.6582 Vestry,MS road-road intersection Level1B 28 2777 100 -88.8169 30.6436 Vestry,MS -L__ road-road intersection -

PAGE 141

Level lB 29 2792 152 -88.8157 30 6341 Vestry, MS road-road intersection Levei1B 30 3008 1040 -88 8038 30.4695 Ocean Springs MS road-road intersection Levei1B 31 3089 970 -88 7845 30 4794 Ocean Springs, MS road-road intersection Levei1B 32 3002 879 -88.7991 30.4985 Ocean Springs, MS road-road intersection Levei1B 33 559 95 -89 .2726 30 7144 Silver Run, MS road-road intersection Level1B 34 199 385 -89 3560 30 6788 Silver Run, MS road road intersection Levei1B 35 244 17 -89.3346 30.7380 Silver Run, MS road-power line cut Leve11B 36 324 275 -89.3274 30 6896 Silver Run, MS road-road intersection Levei1B 37 357 268 -89.3202 30.6898 Silver Run, MS road-road intersection Levei1B 38 391 522 -89 3225 30 6438 Silver Run, MS road-road intersection Level1B 39 515 426 -89.2935 30 6568 Silver Run, MS road-road intersection Level1B 40 529 534 -89 2946 30.6372 Silver Run, MS road-road intersection Level1B 41 2504 204 -88.8767 30 6340 Beatrice, MS road-road intersection Levei1B 42 2369 205 -88.9044 30 6381 Beatrice, MS road-road intersection Level1B 43 2310 241 -88.9178 30.6335 Beatrice, MS road-road intersection Levei1B 44 2050 144 -88.9678 30 6589 Beatrice, MS road-road intersection Level1B 45 2039 14 -88.9653 30.6824 Beatrice MS road-road intersection Levei1B 46 2056 291 -88.9718 30. 6327 Beatrice, MS road road intersection Leve11B 47 2150 298 -88.9529 30 6286 Beatrice, MS road-road intersection Levei1B 48 3126 70 -88.7438 30 6379 Easen Hill, MS road road intersection -N 00

PAGE 142

129 APPENDIXF Description of the Tide Guaging Stations, Location maps, and Copies of the Recorder Chart Plots During Data Collection.

PAGE 143

130 GAGING STATION DESCRIPTION TIDE GAGING STATION AT GULFPORT, MISSISSIPPI STATION NO. 02481341E LOCATION: LATITUDE 30 DEGREES, 21 '37", LONGITUDE 89 DEGREES, 05'27", T.8.S. ,R.11 .W., SEC 9 IN HARRISON COUNTY, HYDROLOGIC UNIT #03170009 ON GULFPORT SOUTH, MS QUAD, IN CORNER OF CONCRETE DOCK ON NORTH END OF EAST PIER NEAR BANANA UNLOADING FACILITY, GULFPORT HARBOR IN GULFPORT, MISSISSIPPI. TO REACH GAGE TURN LEFT OFF OF HIGHWAY 90 ONTO 27TH AVENUE. THEN GO 0.5 TENTHS OF A MILE, GO THROUGH GATE, PROCEED ON SAME ROAD APPROX. 300 FT. GAGE IS LOCATED DUE WEST APPROX. 100FT. FROM ROAD. "SEE ATTACHED MAP DATED 30 SEPTEMBER 1981," ESTABLISHMENT: THE GAGE WAS ESTABLISHED AS A CONTINUOUS RECORDING STATION ON 6 DECEMBER 1966, (INSTALLATION BY CONTRACT TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS; NO DATE.) DRAINAGE AREA: NOT APPLICABLE. A STEVENS A-35 CONTINUOUS WATER LEVEL RECORDER HOUSED IN A 3'X3'X3' METAL SHELTER OVER A 16" FIBERGLASS PIPE ATTACHED TO THE CORNER OF A CONCRETE DOCK; ON THE NORTH END OF THE EAST PIER. ZERO OF GAGE IS 0.00' N.G. V.D. 1971 ADJUSTMENT. HISTORY: A GAGE WAS ESTABLISHED ON 8 MAY 1963 ON THE SOUTH END OF THE WES T PIER OF GULFPORT HARBOR BY H.C. BETTY, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, MOBILE DISTRICT; GAGE WAS MOVED TO NEW LOCATION IN 1966. REFERENCE MARKS: USC & GS S171934AT GULFPORT, MISSISSIPPI, L&N DEPOT, 48 FEET EAST OF CENTERLINE OF G&SI RAILROAD TRACK, 27 FEET SOUTH OF THE CENTERLINE OF THE L&N RAILROAD TRACK. A BRASS DISC IN THE NORTH BRICK WALL OF THE DEPOT AND 18 INCHES EAST O F THE WAITING ROOM DOOR. ELEVATION 28.963 FEET, N.G.V.D. 1971 ADJUSTMENT. RM#1 A CHISELED SQUARE 4 FEET RIGHT OF CENTER OF WELL. ELEVATION 10.161 FEET, N.G.V .D. 1971 ADJUSTMENT. RP OUTSIDE -A CHISELED "SQUARE" ON DOCK WALL APPROXIMATELY 10 FEET EAST OF GAGE WELL. ELEVATION 10.083 FEET, N.G.V.D. 1971 ADJUSTMENT. R.P.G.H, -A PENCILED "SQUARE" ON GAGE HOUSE FLOOR. ELEVATION 12.791 FEET, N.G.V.D. 1971 ADJUSTMENT. CHANNEL: DREDGED ANCHORAGE BASIN. CONTROL: THE STAGE IS CONTROLLED BY FLUCTUATION OF TIDE. DISCHARGE MEASUREMENTS: NONE.

PAGE 144

131 FLOODS: MAXIMUM GAGE HEIGHT 19.68 FEET (FROM HURRICANE CAMILLE HIGH-WATER MARK) 17 AUGUST 1969 ; MINIMUM -4.00 FEET, 12 SEPTEMBER 1979 (FROM HURRICANE FREDERIC AT MOBILE, ALABAMA). POINT OF ZERO FLOW: NOT APPLICABLE. REGULATION: NONE. ACCURACY: THE RECORDS OF STAGE ARE GOOD. (HOWEVER, GAGE HEIGHTS ARE SOMETIMES AFFECTE D BY STRONG WINDS.) REVISED BY: G.C DUVAL 18 OCT 91 CHECKED BY: W.Y. CRAVEN 18 OCT 91

PAGE 145

M s s ICAU ,.,..,. W Mel SOl/ltD GULFPORT LOCATION OF TIDE GAGE 011 ............... ,_ ......... ., UICil, cw oiii.U.., I.A. PLAN tc&&.l -.J 1 t / / 132 / / GULfPORT HARBOR, MISSISSIPPI REVISED TO 30 SEPTEMBER 1981 O"ICI o TMI DIITtiCT INOINIIl MOIIU.

PAGE 146

0 N 0 0 133 V"l 0 I ..... 0"1 0"1 .....

PAGE 147

134 DESCRIPTION OF GAGING STATION AT BILOXI, MISSISSIPPI ON BACK BAY OF BILOXI STATION NO: 02.4803.51E LOCATION: LATITUDE 30 DEGREES 24' 17" LONGITUDE 88 DEGREES 50' 40" SECTION 35, T.7S., R.9W., IN HARRISON COUNTY. FROM DUKATE SCHOOL, BILOXI, MISSISSIPPI, GO ABOUT 2.0 MILES EAST ALONG OLD U.S. HIGHWAY 90 TO BILOXI BAY BRIDGE, GO ABOUT 1 MILE DOWN OLD U.S. HIGHWAY 90 BRIDGE. GAGE IS ON NORTH SIDE OF BRIDGE. ESTABLISHMENT: THE GAGE WAS ESTABLISHED AS A CONTINUOUS RECORDING STATION ON 15 APRIL 1938 BY THE NEW ORLEANS DISTRICT, NEW ORLEANS, LA. DRAINAGE AREA: NOT APPLICABLE. GAGE: A STEVENS A-35 CONTINUOUS WATER LEVEL RECORDER HOUSED IN A METAL SHELTER OVER A 12-INCH PVC WELL ATTACHED TO THE NORTH SIDE OF OLD U.S. HIGHWAY 90 (BILOXI BAY) BRIDGE. GAGE ZERO= 0.00 FEET, N.G.V.D. HISTORY: A SELF REGISTERING TIDE GAGE WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1881 IN THE GULF OF MEXICO NEAR THE SWING SPAN OF THE RAILROAD BRIDGE ACROSS BACK BAY AT BILOXI, MISSISSIPPI. THE GAGE WAS DISCONTINUED ON 10 JUNE 1885, RE ESTABLISHED 28 OCTOBER 1895 AND HAS BEEN MAINTAINED CONTINUOUSLY SINCE THAT DATE, EXCEPT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1 NOVEMBER TO 23 DECEMBER 1930. ON 15 APRIL 1938, A NEW TYPE AUTOMATIC STEVENS RECORDER WAS INSTALLED NEAR THE SWING SPAN OF THE OLD HIGHWAY BRIDGE (PRESENT LOCATION) AT BILOXI, MISSISSIPPI. HOWEVER, THE GAGE AT THE OLD LOCATION WAS RETAINED PENDING FINAL OF THE NEW RECORDER. THE ZERO OF THIS GAGE HAS BEEN MAIN.,.AINED AT 6.083 FEET, BELOW 1'-l.G.V.D., UNTIL liiE TRANSFER CN 30 S E?TEMBER 1983 TO MOBILE DISTRICT WHEN IT WAS CHANGED TO O.OC FEET, N .G.V.D. REFERENCE AND BENCHMARKS: A-C&GS DIS MON. [MORROW :gJa ) -A STANJARC DISC MONUMENT LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST END OF OLD U.S. 90 BRIDGE OVER BILOXI BAY, SET ON TOP CF SOUTHEAST BRIDGE SIDEWALK, 13.5 FEET NORTHEAST OF THE SOUTHWEST END OF THE BRIDGE, 1 0 FEET NORTHWEST OF THE SOUTHEAST BRIDGE RAILING AND 0.8 FEET ABOVE THE BRIDGE FLOOR. ELEVATION 11.713 FEET, N.G.V.D. BM BRIDGE A CHISELED SQUARE IN BRIDGE CURB AT FOOT OF GUARD RAIL ON NORTH SIDE OF BILOX I BAY BRIDGE. 8M IS ON CORNER OF CURB AROUND PARKING AREA ON BILOX I SIDE OF DRAW SPAN. ELEVATION 19.142 FEET, N.G.V.D. RP A CHISELED SQUARE ON TOP OF CONCRETE GUARDRAIL 1 FOOT WEST OF GAGE. ELEVATION 21.876 FEET, N.G.V.D. R.P.G.H. TWO HACK SAW MARKS IN METAL PLATFORM WEST SIDE OF wELL OPENING. ELEVATION 21.862 FEET, N .G.V.O. CHANNEL: -THERE IS ONE NAVIGATION CHANNEL NEAR THE GAGE. IT IS USED F O R SMALL CRAFTS AND LEADS TO OPEN WATER.

PAGE 148

CONTROL: -THE STAGE IS CONTROLLED BY FLUCTUATION OF TIDE. DISCHARGE MEASUREMENT: -NONE. 135 FLQQDS: A HIGH WATER MARK OF 16.88 FEET, N.G.V .D. WAS LEFT ON 19 SEPTEMBER 1947 WHEN THE GAGE WAS DESTROYED BY A HURRICANE. A MAXIMU M GAGE HEIGHT OF 14.64 FEET,.N.G.V.D. WAS RECORDED ON 10 SEPTEMBER 1965 AT 1:05 A.M. poiNT OF ZERO FLOW: NOT APPLICABLE. REGULATION: NONE. ACCURACY: RECORDS OF STAGE ARE GOOD. HOWEVER, GAGE HEIGHTS ARE AFFECTED BY STRONG SOUTH WINDS. PREPARED BY: G. C. DUVAL 9 MARCH 1990 CHECKED B Y : MARK S. DAVIS 9 MARCH 1990

PAGE 149

0 N y UNO I I ON O F TIDE GAGE . ...... PLAN \.(I N MILlS A C K S .. ........ -.. ":IN HTtucoasTAl.. TIIIIW&t 1 1 '"o H&avCT LOC, II(W OIILAHt, LOUIIIANA 136 \ .. \ \ \ \ ,,-., \\ (. ___ f -; \._; \ \ \ ." BILOXI HARBOR, MISSISSIPPI REV I SED TO 30 SEPTEMBER 1 981 oPICI o THI OISTIICT INOINIII MOIILI. ALAI ,UU

PAGE 150

0 C'i V') V') 0 J J 'j -r--i-{jJ+ . -.. 0 0 JWI J I I I -I' I l l I I: . -= n-u + tr.iJ:'-". : '.d. I I r-.!:L, J l ;.,.... -H ; . t -1[1 '-, ..J I -1 I : L I i . l I -. l t:' . . . I l I. I l I .J. I . I .Jtrt : 1 4--IJ.,-rrr -.r 1J--.. i 1 i h n -,. . j i t t( 1 f J .r l i+Jii i LfJ i i#l i ;'fk/1: l1t f'J lf +: l: . I H :ri .,. r'-' m -I t I ,_ I' 1 -+ f. . -: IJ L[l : T' 'I' r:j t t -:);1-T : f -1 -_ r=n-, 1 1 1 :! i =-__ --r ... -H-[ ..,_ _] k._J H . I I UOON I I . I -!' . l .. . +-L :1"--1 +r -I : ff_ ::J T c;'EIf. : 1: : . f:l. : h n .. . -r p tH il" I ..J.I., 1. . .. tr 1 H 1]:J:ittf-I _,-1 I .. . I""!" I \- IJ. itt' + I I ' tuPiW .r ' '" ' -. : J--. J ; I .J., I i l:. I ; . ; 1" -t L j,,, ,,,,_,, l!i '+ -Tff Wt:t I I .... 1 J.l I l 1 1 . .LL .L ...1. 1 + i T j t-i h. : r + t 1 1 +.. ,..!4-t-r. LJ. JJ,+t' 't' trli -t .. '' l , '' .-++. -+h 1 . jjj . -l . t ..... T" l W FR -ri,, .,, H--t,.,,. 1 .. rr J. ,-. -137 0 V') 0 I ...... ...... ..c::: 0.0 ::c '0 -f---4 ._ 0 0 -.. 5: -. 1 '5 . ..c::: u '"' r-00 '0 '"' 0\ 0 -...0 --. ...... C1) -.0 . E C1) > 0 -z --r ---

PAGE 151

13. DESCRIPTION OF PASCAGOULA TIDE GAGE AT PASCAGOULA, Y ISSISSIPPI STATION NO: 02.4603.01E LOCAI!QN : LATITUDE 30 DEGREES, 20' 35", LONGITUDE 88 DEGREES, 33' 50" IN SECT I ON 5, T 6 S . R 6 W ON SOUTH SIDE OF U S COAST GUARD S1'AT I ON BY COWYNIE BAYOU ON THE PASCAGOULA RIVER ESTABLISHMENT: THE GAGE WAS ESTABLISHED AS A CONTINUOUS RECORDING STATION DN 6 JULY 1972 BY H. C. BETTY, U S ARWY CORPS OF ENGINEERS WOBILE DISTRICT DRAINAGE AREA: NOT APPLICABLE QMI : A STEVENS A-35 CONTINUOUS WATER LEVEL RECORDER HOUSED IN A 30" X 30" X30" YETAL SHELTER OVER A 16" FIBERGLASS WELL ATTACHED TO TID! CREOSOTE PILING NEXT TO THE CONCRETE WHARF AT THE COAST GUARD STATION ZERO OF GAG! IS -Q.12 FEET, N G V D 1971 ADJUSTWENT. HISTORY : A FRIEZ WEEKLY RECORDER WAS ESTABLISHED IN A GAGE HOUSE LOCATED A SOUTHWEST OUTFITTING DOCK ON EAST SIDE OF CHANNEL IN INGALLS' SHIPYARD ON 1 JULY 1940 BY J. W FIDLER AND WAS CONTINUED IN USE UNTIL 3 JULY 1964. A STEVENS CONTINUOUS RECORDER WAS INSTALLED AI THE SAWE LOCATION ON 10 JULY 1 964 AND WAS CONTINUED IN USE UNTIL 14 MARCH 1969. THE SAYE STEVENS CONTINUOUS RECORDER AND GAGE HOUSE WERE RELOCATED TO LAKE YAZOO INLET NEXT TO THE OLD COAST GUARD STATION IN SltALL CRAFT HARBOR BY H C BETTY ON 2 APR! L 1969 rnEN REPLACED ON 3 SEPTEWBER 1969 BY H. C. BETTY A' THE SAME LOCATION. THE GAGING STATION WAS REWOVED ON 31 WAY 1972. REFERENCE AND BENCH MARKS: BRASS DISC IS LOCATED ON NORTiiWEST CORNER OF THl GALLEY END OF CONCRETE PLATFORM AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF COAST GUARD BU I LD I NG DISC I S STAMPED U S COAST GUARD" ELEVATION 7 430 FEET GAGE DATUN. ELEVATION 7 .310 FEET. N .G.V.D. TI!Mt.l -A CHISELED SQUARE ON TOP OF CONCRETE PILLAR ANCHOR BLOCK 8 FEET NORTH OF DOCK AND 1 FOOT SHOREWARD FROW WATER'S EDGE SIDE OF DOCK. ELEVATION ABOVE GAGE ZERO 6 .278 FEET GAGE DATUW. ELEVATION .ABOVE N .G.V. D 6 .158 FEET, 1971 ADJUSTWENT. IB1itU A CHISELED "+" AT EAST END OF STEEL RAILS RUNNING mE LENGTH OF DOCKS IN NORTH RAIL 2" STRE.AWWARD FROW EAST END OF RAIL ELEVATION ABOVE GAGE ZERO IS 6 .048 FEET ELEVATION ABOVE N G V D. 5 .928 FEET, 1971 ADJUSTWENT. (DESTROYED 12 APRIL 1988) R P G H IS A PENCILED SQUARE ON GAGE HOUSE PLATFORM IN FRONT OF RECORDER. ELEVATION ABOVE GAGE ZERO IS 9 322 FEET GAGE DATUW. ELEVATION ABOVE N G V D IS 9 2 0 2 FEET 1971 ADJUSTWENT. REA -A 3 / 8 INCH LAG BOLT IN VERTICAL 6"X6" P I LING AT NORTHEAST END OF BOAT STALL AND 8 FEET STREAMWARD FROM GAGE WELL. ELEVA TION .ABOVE GAGE ZERO IS 4.230 FEET GAGE DATUW. E LEVATION ABOVE N G V D 4 .110 FEET 1971 ADJUSTMENT.

PAGE 152

CHANNEL: NONE CONTRQL: THE STAGE IS CONTROLLED BY FLUCTUATION OF TIDE. 0 I SCHABGE MEASUBOONTS : NONE FLQQDS: THE GAGE RECORDED A STAGE OF 5 .76 FEET. N G V D DURING HURRICANE FREDERIC ON 12 SEPTEMBER 1979 PO I NT Of' ZERQ FLOW: NOT APPLICABLE REGUI.AT I ON : NONE ACCURACY: RECORDS Of' STAGE ARE GOOD PREPARED BY: G C DUVAL 09 AUG 68 CHECKED BY: J H LEE, IV 16 AOO 88 139

PAGE 153

IQ ,. -.... ...., .,l -.... -----

PAGE 154

0 (") ::r ::g 0 s 0 ...... .... Q. e .... Otl ::r ,_ ,_ "tl 0 c:: \0 00 r _'-f-f: 1" l j I I 1 D 1-l _ 1 _: _ .. .... : -' rlfi I __ 1 -1_ _1!:1 T . -T-_ -I . t IJIt I + :.. . : T : :-t-_1. r+ . I 1 II II II I : L q I c I -II i k1111 j H ... 1 -__ __ 1 fl + H 1111 1 .. . . . f -. t I ;;!:,;..-!<:= . l . -t i 1 1 11: . . . t I . . : .. . . . -r : r -.. : ... .-: -l . : : . : : . : . .. . : -. : r-t=t== . -.. .. ., I . --rn H-i -T Noon :r .. .. i . : 1 !" -I::W:U=I=I-::1T t -"iJ. ---:.. -.. 1-1r 1 T I "t 1 -i 1-- r I + I H+----m ] r f l-H -@ I I I I I I -. : .. + -!; -r l 1 -:__ . : -. =t .. I I : +1. -. :nti+ +-I: : _J! : . tt1rt1 -J .! J-1. r ff. q.-J .+-1 -.. H -l. 1 ,1fr :1 1 k i -r 11I VI 0 VI 0 IV IV VI 0 v. w 0 l.;:-----:; I J L -!+, .. ) ; :_-, I lf' ' ;, --J .:. ... J .. ,. -'-' J ' ,,_,e; :=, :_: : .. .. . ;.: 12:;:, : -::: . r ; .-:::t :.: i i ; : E;;: t : ;: ; .. : ; : : : ...':. 1 i i : : . ; 1 : E:: .. .. ; 1 .. r f,--: -.-1 ... o l 1-;,-: .-! -,-1 I ... ;-, .-: . ... .. ,... ... C/) i :-r"'T,, 1 :. --rr;I fTTI t :I-' r\:-I fl ... r ; . .. '--; , ;I. . : ... i'' : ... -. .. .. \ lo , .., != .. 1"1 :f 'j' i : t I . :::1 ;!: ; . r; I .. r ,. i ; : I . I 0t1 . -:;-.--:.. . -, ... ... ... ... -.... + -i .. .. M1dn1ght.. Alllo'j"' .... i -1 -1r; ,-.-f . ,--' ; .. i 1 : .. . = Tl t ;... :1' ;-.j ' .. ,.., ... I : j I [ j 1 : ..... I ; I ..I I ... L : Otl =+ ;:..! .. :-+ : . : :: :: . r;_::::;:, : : .; : ...__;_::: 8 F ::<>. : .... l ; : : ; i: .1 _; !_ : __ ':. I : 0' L+:-'-:j :!ii j-:t; ; : : :. :: 'li :.; ; -' , 1 ,:, : ; ::S 3 . I ... I , -;-t -;-i-'-,L:.,,, .... : . i -:- "'f--1 ,. I I ; I I ' : I I i I I : j : : I., I : i -;-; : I ; I : I -.. .. , .... I I ' ... 0 I I I ; ""-J I I I I I I I I I I I I T l .-h L j : 1 i Ti .... ;i : i 11' .-, ;: 11'-1-; T: Noon i r .... : .,.; ..., ti .. -ff. r o 1 ........ '--1 -. ., t.r' 1+11' ,-r-,. r -11.:_1! I: 1 : il I! 1 .. 1 i !; ---,-1-r r j:i:,!. ; -:;-,.l !: t f,+l ')"j"'o' l r: r l -l'; J.!, ... + I 1" . .. ]' I ( : t_,--1 I I .' I i I .' [ I I I 1"1 j I I I -, t-r -:_j : I I. : . Jl : I I I '-I ;.,.fr . r I ..... .. l -' .. . .1 \0 ;..1., .. 1 -t : .,+J--1-'-, --1 ,.1_. \0 : I'.i'1!' +{1: t .,-1ji'f-1 .. :; .--' .. .: 1 1 1 : T ,-,-1: i!l 1f'' 1 7; j ' '; L1L-r;',-f',i" -----,, J; . .. .... r r . .. f l r : .. , ( i : I .: !. : .. i., 11.. = 1 '1 I .. J. 1 ___ I .: .,r t l _, j r JL . t I .1. I IJ I t 1 -I I _1 ' . I l : I t I ' j I I I r I I I I I I I I I I r r 'I' ,-ll r r tlti "ffi ... -, 1 c--.-.. ... ; -;n -rTf, .. . .. ;+ Mldmght 1 .. -.. iT 1 11 t i1'l"t 1 T lr' j .. i 1 i'-!; ... : rj,-Jt--:.t. i -11 .-.: h . 1., -1----l I:. 1 : I .: r,-:r--rl t1T:Ir, l .. -l:''i 1+ : :. .. _1:.!:;. ; :. I I 11-t,,i ,,:. ; ,'j.i,.'! :, ;,;; 1 1 r : J 1 1 1 .J l 1 1 .' 1 : J .. t 1 : !" r 1 .. 1 i : -1 ; 1 : t 1 : _rt1 _fl13 L1.L1 I I fl 1 ; I : J. 1 f I 1 1-:'.r : ---: i:'1 -:;_;-; : t! t 1_1-_1_1-. 1it:l. _r:_._l t I . . 1 f, u l .. I . I I I . . .. . L j 1 1 : l r : 1 r 1 1 .. .r-t:t.r..t+ -!,,-!--r:i.. -! :.1-:: :'.IJ rr 1 i r1 I I I I I r I : \ '. I I : I .. ' I ; I I I I . I -r--H-r:tl" :I ..... r r r -1 ..... 1 I . I . I I I I I I I I I i I I i. I i . I ; I : .... .. IPI

PAGE 155

DESCRIPT ION or CAGING STATION ON DAUPHIN ISLAND BAY AT DAUPHIN ISLAND, ALABAWA LOCATION: LATITUDE 30 DECREES, 15 '28", LONGITUDE 88 DEGREES, 06'28", AT 142 NORTIIEAST SIDE or DAUPHIN ISLAND THE CAGE IS ATTACHED TO CONCRETE BULKHEAD BEHIND TifE STATE OF ALABAWA WARINE RESOURCES LABORATORY, UND,:R COVERED BOAT DOCK AT TifE NORTHWEST END OF A CANAL. ESTABLISHMENT: THE GAGE WAS ESTABLISHED AS A CONTINUOUS RECORDING STATION ON 14 JUNE 196 3 BY H C BETTY JORDAN AND DOWNAG, U. S ARMY CORPS or ENGINEERS, WOBILE DISTRICT DRAINAGE AREA: NOT APPLICABLE A STEVENS CONTINUOUS WATER LEVEL RECORDER HOUSED IM A 30" X30 X30" WETAL SHELTER OVER AN 18 FIBEBGLASS WELL ATTACHED TO TiiE CONCRE'R! BULJ
PAGE 156

143 FLOODS: A HIGH WATER WARK OF 8 2 N G V D FROW HURRICANE FREDERIC WAS FOUND AT THE PRESENT GAGE SITE. POINT OF ZERQ FLOW: NOT APPLICABLE REGULATION: NONE ACCURACY : THE RECORDS OF STAGE ARE GOOD HOWEVER, GAGE HEIGHTS ARE AffECTED BY WINDS DUE TO THE GEOWETRY OF 11iE CANAL. REVISED BY: G C DUVAL 27 FEB 88 CHECKED BY: J H. LEE, IV 7 APR 88

PAGE 157

-j \.\ _{ ........ ,./ .... .,,/ t ........ J 'I / SOl/NO .. # .... I .... . # .. J .. .. ..... ... .. ,;. .. ... ' .; Mere 11.. e . : BAr . -:.... ... ...... ...... .. .. , \ N I -.. 144 8 A r DAUPHIN ISLAND MARINE LAB LOCATION OF TIDE GAGE .. ', :, I .. PeLICAN .. 0 : .. 8 A 'f' Gl/LF OF Mext co : .. :. ... .. : ......... ... I .. .,. PLAN SCALI I ll trUT 0 3090 =. . ,: ... ... -... .. I ... .. .. ,, I . ' OCnltt &Ill Ill trUT &110 T O MUll W&TIII. 011 IIITIIAC:OAITAL WATUWAT I I ,_ M<YIT IIIW OIILIAJOI, LA DAUPHIN ISLAND SAY ALABAMA REVISED TO 30 SEPTEMBER 1981 OHICl OP THl OISTIICT lNOIPUU MOIILI. AUUMA

PAGE 158

' M I I I : I ; !lTf'! 'ijf . __;_;<.1.. I.; I j.L..i....:: I I I i I . . I I I-+' ,. / o : I I 1-..-'--L__; I I In" I j !12 ... FlP: i I I I __:_j___J I: I !I. !-i-..!..1 I -+-:.Ll' I I ,-1 T I-,, i"'i: 11 1 --ib 1\rT-t-++-+---,.._,..... ...c: 1111 1111 \J :"0 3.0 2 5 2 .0 1.5 1.0 :::::r:rr::rr:r $ 0.5 ' 0 .0 0 5 November 6 1987 ---_ L .. .. I -...... : l'c;p+-:_ ;'T u._:-:+ f "0 1 :TJ:r J:j:-'--' 0 ...'. ... '--_ -o . .,_..,..., ; _ .. i: _ --.. r!!_C _, ___ _1... .. . .. ... ----'ld' ::w-:GAGf-IIFfflli l"-- --...... _;_ _;. :-: .-_ ::--_. _---= November 1, 1991 Recorder Chart Plots of Tidal Height at Dauphin Island, AL Guaging Station. .....