LOJIC Survey monuments placed approximately 1 1/2 to 2 miles from nearest neighbor. Primary control information for each monument is provided in the attached attribute fields. View detailed metadata.

This is a point data set representing monumented vertical geodetic survey control points (a.k.a. elevation benchmarks) established by the City of Boise. A benchmark is a physical marker, monument, or demarcation established by a surveyor for horizontal and/or vertical measurement control. This data set only contains benchmarks established by the City of Boise that are based on the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88); benchmarks established under other vertical datums are not included. The elevation values in this data set are based on the vertical control from the National Geodetic Survey (NGS), the U. S. Geological Survey (USGS), and some state owned vertical control. The horizontal location is obtained by Global Positioning System (GPS) data collection of the surveyed benchmark. Attribute data including elevation, is transcribed from surveying field books supplied by Boise City Public Works survey personnel.

This layer contains the data for the survey control points and benchmarks for the City of Round Rock, located in Williamson County, Texas. This layer is part of an original dataset provided and maintained by the City of Round Rock GIS/IT Department. The data in this layer are represented as points. A survey benchmark is a reference point that is used to calculate something. A benchmark, in surveying, can be referred to a permanent mark created at a recognized height which is used as the basis for measuring different altitudes of topographical points.A survey control point is an accurately surveyed coordinate location for a physical feature that can be identified on the ground. This layer contains information about each point's type, project title, firm, location, date, and vertical datum used if applicable. Prior to the digitization of these survey benchmarks and control points, a previous survey was completed in 2004 which established 41 control points throughout the city. Those points have been added to this layer, but you can still view their documentation in the following paragraph:Find the control point nearest your area to determine the corresponding data sheet, and find the download link below. You can also download the monument coordinates and report synopsis.GPS Point Data Sheets:01-001 01-002 01-003 01-00401-005 01-006 01-007 01-00801-009 01-010 01-011 01-01201-013 01-014 01-015 01-01601-017 01-018 01-019 01-02001-021 01-022 01-023 01-02401-025 01-026 01-027 01-02801-029 01-030 01-031 01-03201-033 01-034 01-035 01-03601-037 01-038 01-039 01-04001-041

This dataset provides information about the position, position accuracy, mark name, mark type, condition and unique four letter code for geodetic marks in terms of a New Zealand's official geodetic datum.

The dataset only contains marks that are within the New Zealand mainland and offshore islands. These positions have been generated using geodetic observations such as precise differential GPS or electronic distance and theodolite angles measurements. The positions are either 2D or 3D depending of the availability of this measurement data.

The source data is from Toitū Te Whenua Land Information New Zealand's (LINZ) Landonline system where it is used by Land Surveyors. This dataset is updated daily to reflect changes made in the Landonline.

Accuracy

Geodetic marks with a coordinate order of 5 or less have been positioned in terms of NZGD2000. Lower order marks (order 6 and greater) are derived from cadastral surveys, lower accuracy measurement techniques or inaccurate historical datum transformations, and may be significantly less accurate.

The accuracy of NZGD2000 coordinates is described by a series of 'orders' classifications. Positions in terms of NZGD2000 are described by three-dimensional coordinates (latitude, longitude, ellipsoidal height). The accuracy of a survey mark is indicated by its Order. Orders are classifications based on the quality of the coordinate in relation to the datum and in relation to other surrounding marks. For more information see

Note that the accuracy applies at the time the mark was last surveyed. Refer to the web geodetic database for historical information about mark coordinates.

Note also that the existence of a mark in this dataset does not imply that there is currently a physical mark in the ground - the dataset includes destroyed or lost historical marks. The geodetic database provides more information on the mark status, valid at last time it was visited by LINZ or a maintenance contractor.

Mascot geodetic control monuments for BC. Geodetic Control Monuments are a network of interconnected markers in the ground which have accurately determined coordinates, and/or elevations. They are fixed points on which to spatially reference surveys, mapping, aerial and satellite imaging, etc

Data in this document record the ground-surface positions from 1996 to 2023 of monuments located on different kinematic elements of the Cleveland Corral landslide, or on nearby more stable ground. Data were collected about once a year in campaign mode, at times when the landslide was dormant and not moving (typically late spring or fall). Survey timing was selected to identify wet-season movement of the slide, which typically occurs during the winter and spring. Between 1996 and 2000, positional information was collected by surveying pins (with rod and prism) from a total station instrument located across the valley from the landslide. Between June 2000 and March 2004, no surveys were performed. Starting in 2004, positional information for monuments was determined using static differential Global Positioning System (GPS) surveying techniques with a nearby reference site located on stable ground. Details of the GPS surveying and processing techniques are further described in the Data_Quality_Information section of the FGDC Metadata. One file is provided for each of the two periods of measurement. Initial monuments were pins (large nails) and rebar for aerial photo targets located on and off the active slide. These were replaced or supplemented by rebar in 1999 and 2000. When GPS surveying began, new rebar with aluminum-cap monuments were driven into the ground. The number of monuments evolved over the years as some were destroyed or buried by landslide activity and others added. This data release includes five files: 1) geographic positions of survey pins/rebar, 1996 - 2000, 2) geographic positions of GPS monuments starting in 2004, 3) image showing the locations of the pins and monuments, 4) the 2004 OPUS solution used to obtain the GPS base-station position, and 5) revision history.

These datasets contain records of Queensland's geodetic survey control information. The database provides for the effective management of the geodetic survey control information for Queensland for which the Department of Resourcesis responsible under the Survey and Mapping Infrastructure Act 2003. The records contain: Registered number - number of survey control mark Local Authority - name of local authority Vertical Height - height of mark Vertical Datum - datum of the height.

A physical marker that is used as a stable basis for survey measurement. The mark is normally coordinated either horizontally and/or vertically using a recognised coordinate system. The mark can be used to coordinate surveys in the surrounding area. Survey Control Marks are displayed in ACTmapi by Mark type. Trig Stations (MC) Identifier: district names, old surveyors' names, for example, Tennent, Goodwin. Today's trig stations consist of a ground mark with a white quadripod supporting a black disc above the ground mark. Most of these Trig Stations are part of the ACT Precision Zone, a national geodetic survey and adjustment carried out in the early 1970s. The ACT Precision Zone and its associated marks have been the primary control for all new development in the ACT since the early 1970s. The accuracy of ACT Precision Zone marks is 1 in 250,000. Sectional Control Marks (SC) Identifier: two alpha plus 1, 2 or 3 numerals, for example, TG116 These marks are fixed directly from the ACT Precision Zone at about one kilometre intervals. They usually consist of a deep driven rod protected by yellow concrete posts. Some Sectional Control marks are beaconed (for example, YA90, TG84). The accuracy of Sectional Control marks is 1 in 100,000. Subdivision or Neighbourhood Control Marks or "RMs" (SRM) Identifier: three numerals, for example, 363 These marks are fixed from the Sectional Control at intervals of between 200 and 400 metres. They usually consist (on placement only) of a galvanised pipe set in concrete protected by two steel droppers painted red and white. There may be an aluminium tag with the mark's identifier either set in the concrete of the mark or wired to one of the steel droppers. The accuracy of Subdivision Control is 1 in 30,000. The subdivisions in Woden Valley (early 1960s) were the first to have Subdivision Control. In suburbs constructed before Gungahlin (pre-1990), Subdivision Control marks were 50 to 100 metres apart. Some of these marks survived development and can be found in open spaces in the suburbs. Only those SRMs in Gungahlin have been entered in the Survey Control Mark Detail Database Control Base. Information on others is contained on plans. Coordinated Reference Marks or CRMs (CRM) Identifier: CRM plus numerals - starting at 1 eg. CRM7381 In today's subdivisions numbered CRM plaques are placed in the kerb and coordinated by survey traverses that start and finish on Sectional or Subdivisional Control marks or other previously coordinated CRMs. These marks are about 50 to 150 metres apart. Only subdivisions constructed after 1980 contain CRMs that appear on Deposited Plans. Most do not have a height attributed to them. Many CRMs have been placed in the older suburbs of Canberra in recent years. These CRMs were coordinated using GPS and are on the AGC system, which is not the system of the surrounding subdivision. Since 16 April 1998 a new style of CRM is used that has a raised nipple for accurate levelling. These are numbered from 10,001 and up. SR (Steel rod) Marks (SR) Identifier: SR plus numerals - starting at 1 eg. SR1003 The ACT Government Survey Office places SR marks in new subdivisions - one for every 100 blocks. The mark consists of a deep driven steel rod contained within a small manhole marked "Survey mark". These SRs are included in the CRM traverses and are precise levelled. Many other SR marks have been placed throughout Canberra. Most are coordinated on the AGC system which may not be the coordinate system of the surrounding subdivision. Not all SR marks are levelled. Conversely, some SRs have been levelled, but are yet to be surveyed for co-ordinates. Kerb Bench Mark (KBM) Identifier: KBM plus numerals - starting at 1, for example, KBM5203 Kerb Bench Marks are placed in the kerbs throughout urban Canberra. They consist of a rectangular brass casting with a nipple and number. Distance between KBMs in new suburbs is 100 to 200 metres and levelling is to 3rd order accuracy. (Many kerbs have moved and differences of more than 3 centimetres have been found). All KBM levels are on the Australian Height Datum (AHD). Precise Bench Marks (PBMs) are listed in the KBM register under their number (for example, PBM13 is KBM13). PBMs are precast concrete blocks that were part of earlier Imperial levelling network on an earlier Canberra datum: Precise Datum or PD. (To convert PD reduced levels (feet) to AHD (metres), subtract 1.07 feet from the PD value, then multiply the result by 0.3048 to give the AHD value). Rural Bench Marks (RBM) Identifier: RBM plus numerals - starting at 1, for example, R376 Rural Bench Marks were placed in the 1970s, at half mile - one kilometre - intervals, along many roads in the ACT. They consist of a star-iron picket driven to its full length into the ground and surrounded by a concrete collar containing a brass plaque with the mark's identifier. One yellow concrete post may be protecting it. In recent years many of these marks have been coordinated from GPS surveys. Other rural bench marks with identifiers "P", "NE", "NW" and "C" can be found on roads in the ACT. Not all have level (AHD) values. Photo Control Marks (PC) Identifier: One alpha plus thee numerics. Photo Control marks consist of a G.I Pipe in concrete protected by a wood post painted red and white. Many Photo Control marks are for "level only" and their accuracy depends on the scale of the photography they are controlling. Alpha Marks (AM) Identifier: Three alphas - starting at AAA Alpha Marks usually consist of a GI Pipe in concrete protected by two steel droppers. They are usually placed as a control mark for a specific survey - usually an engineering survey. The accuracy of these marks depends on the nature of the survey they are part of. Many are of an accuracy that does not warrant nominating the coordinate system. Miscellaneous Marks (MS) Miscellaneous marks are any mark not contained in the previous categories (apart from Recovery marks). Some examples are old radial blocks, control marks placed before Sectional Control series commenced, dam deformation marks. Recovery Marks Identifier: RM plus numeral plus mark it recovers (for example, RM2 Painter) Recovery Marks are close to more important marks. Creative Commons License Creative Common By Attribution 4.0 (Australian Capital Territory), Please read Data Terms and Conditions statement before data use.

The Geodetic Database contains information on permanent geodetic control marks located in Minnesota or just outside its boundaries. Permanent geodetic control marks are established for the purpose of providing precise horizontal and vertical control positions for the registration of surveying and mapping activities in the local area. Information about the location of an object based on its geodetic location locates that object in a worldwide geographic information system. The marks have unique identification and year established stamped on the monument disk, usually an 89 mm (3.5 inch) diameter brass or aluminum disk. Monuments consist of material (concrete or metal) that is meant to stay in place for 50 to 100 years or more, and have little or no movement due to frost action or activity near the monument. The marks have been established by all levels of government in Minnesota, and they are referenced to the National Geodetic Reference System (NAD 1927, NAD 1983, NGVD 1929, and NAVD 1988). The Federal Government supports monumentation at the state level by providing technical expertise, adjustments of the data, and maintenance of the National Geodetic Reference System through its State Advisor Program.

This dataset contains RTK GPS Data collected between April, 2017 and March, 2018 for 5 paired Control/Treatment gully sites being monitored as part of NESP Project 2.1.4 (Demonstration and evaluation of gully remediation on downstream water quality and agricultural production in GBR rangelands). The key question being asked is “is there measurable improvement in the erosion and water quality leaving remediated gully sites compared to sites left untreated?” The monitoring approach uses a modified BACI (Before after control impact) design.

The data in presented in this metadata are part of a larger collection and are intended to be viewed in the context of the project. For further information on the project, view the parent metadata record: Demonstration and evaluation of gully remediation on downstream water quality and agricultural production in GBR rangelands (NESP TWQ 2.1.4, CSIRO).

Monitoring of these sites is continuing as part of NESP TWQ Project 5.9. Any temporal extensions to this dataset will be linked to from this record.

Methods:

RTK (Real time kinematic) GPS system (Ashtech, ProMark 200), set with a tolerance of +/- 12mm in the horizontal plane and +/- 15mm in the vertical, was used to survey the monitored gullies. The initial location of the base station was determined using a 10-minute average. All permanent infrastructure such as survey markers, fences, and instrumentation. Gully features such as headcut rims, long sections and cross sections (at key locations such as near instrumentation) were captured. Raw GPS data files were converted to text, imported to Excel for attribute assignments, and then imported to ArcGIS for conversion to shapefile format.

Format:

This data collection consists of 5 zip files (one for each paired gully monitoring site). Zip files are named according to the property on which they are located. Each zip file contains two shapefiles with detailed RTK GPS survey data from either 2017 or 2018 for the Control and Treatment gullies. Survey point types include Reference markers, gully cross sections, long sections and the gully headcut.

Data Dictionary:

Attributes for each point include Easting (E) and Northing (N) location info (MGA94 Z55, AHD), descriptive text (Comment), horizontal accuracy (HRMS), vertical accuracy (VRMS), RTK Fix or Float status (STATUS), Number of satellites (SATS), 3D position dilution of precision (PDOP), horizontal dilution of precision (HDOP), Vertical dilution of precision (VDOP), time and date of survey point(Timestamp), and Point type (Type). More information on Dilution of Precision can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilution_of_precision_(navigation)

Point Types include REF and BASEREF - Reference markers include permanent survey markers XSREF - Cross Section Transect markers VEGREF - vegetation transect markers STRUCTREF) - Structure markers INSTRREF - location of instrumentation TLSREF - Laser scanner permanent markers gully cross sections (XS) LS - long sections RIM - headcut rim
RIMNICK - headcut nickpoint

Site_Code used for file names is as follows: MIV = Minnievale MV = Meadowvale MW = Mount Wickham SB = Strathbogie VP = Virginia Park

References:

Bartley, Rebecca; Hawdon, Aaron; Henderson, Anne; Wilkinson, Scott; Goodwin, Nicholas; Abbott, Brett; Baker, Brett; Matthews, Mel; Boadle, David; Jarihani, Ben (Abdollah). Quantifying the effectiveness of gully remediation on off-site water quality: preliminary results from demonstration sites in the Burdekin catchment (second wet season). RRRC: NESP and CSIRO; 2018. csiro:EP184204.

Data Location:

This dataset is filed in the eAtlas enduring data repository at: data esp2\2.1.4 Gully-remediation-effectiveness

The horizontal position of the remotely operated vehicle (ROV) during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition between November 2019 and September 2020 was measured using an acoustic Long Base Line (LBL) positioning system (LinkQuest Pinpoint). The position was recorded in the SPOT.ON survey systems software (OceanModulesTM). The track was smoothed from initial acoustic fixes and cleaned for most obvious outliers. The position is in a floe-fixed, relative coordinate system (X, Y) with the origin (X=0 m, Y=0 m) at the ROV hole. A quality flag for the position is introduced based on the time to the closest fix with “1” indicating good positon (fix reached 3s & 5s). Depending on the scientific aim, a position with quality flag “3” can still be useful. Vehicle depth was measured by the integrated pressure sensor and calibrated to 0 during pre-survey procedures, when the top side of the vehicle was at the same level as the water surface. Vehicle attitude (roll, pitch, heading) was measured with an onboard inertial measuring unit (IMU, Microstrain) with three axis accelerometer, magnetometer and gyroscope. Depth was measured by a pressure sensor (Keller A-21Y, Keller AG) included in the main electronics housing of the ROV. Horizontal position (X,Y):• Leg 1: Scale factors and offsets to successfully improve positions for surveys PS122_1_5_62_20191102_1 and PS122_1_6_16_20191105_1 were obtained by comparing positions of markers from the ROV and a terrestrial laser scanner (RIEGL). Scale factors and offsets for surveys PS122_1_6_31_20191106_1, PS122_1_6_118_20191110_1, PS122_1_7_18_20191112_1, PS122_1_7_55_20191113_1 are based on estimates but will be improved also using markers.• Leg 4: Positions for surveys PS122_4_48_213_20200726_1 and PS122_4_49_105_20200728_1 are partly distorted probably due to usage of drifting transponder(s) or erroneous transponder position configuration. Retrieving suitable scale factors and offsets was not successful so far.• Leg 5: probably due to drifting transponder(s). Retrieving suitable scale factors and offsets was not successful so far.

The horizontal position of the remotely operated vehicle (ROV) during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition between November 2019 and September 2020 was measured using an acoustic Long Base Line (LBL) positioning system (LinkQuest Pinpoint). The position was recorded in the SPOT.ON survey systems software (OceanModulesTM). The track was smoothed from initial acoustic fixes and cleaned for most obvious outliers. The position is in a floe-fixed, relative coordinate system (X, Y) with the origin (X=0 m, Y=0 m) at the ROV hole. A quality flag for the position is introduced based on the time to the closest fix with “1” indicating good positon (fix reached 3s & 5s). Depending on the scientific aim, a position with quality flag “3” can still be useful. Vehicle depth was measured by the integrated pressure sensor and calibrated to 0 during pre-survey procedures, when the top side of the vehicle was at the same level as the water surface. Vehicle attitude (roll, pitch, heading) was measured with an onboard inertial measuring unit (IMU, Microstrain) with three axis accelerometer, magnetometer and gyroscope. Depth was measured by a pressure sensor (Keller A-21Y, Keller AG) included in the main electronics housing of the ROV. Horizontal position (X,Y):• Leg 1: Scale factors and offsets to successfully improve positions for surveys PS122_1_5_62_20191102_1 and PS122_1_6_16_20191105_1 were obtained by comparing positions of markers from the ROV and a terrestrial laser scanner (RIEGL). Scale factors and offsets for surveys PS122_1_6_31_20191106_1, PS122_1_6_118_20191110_1, PS122_1_7_18_20191112_1, PS122_1_7_55_20191113_1 are based on estimates but will be improved also using markers.• Leg 4: Positions for surveys PS122_4_48_213_20200726_1 and PS122_4_49_105_20200728_1 are partly distorted probably due to usage of drifting transponder(s) or erroneous transponder position configuration. Retrieving suitable scale factors and offsets was not successful so far.• Leg 5: probably due to drifting transponder(s). Retrieving suitable scale factors and offsets was not successful so far.

The horizontal position of the remotely operated vehicle (ROV) during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition between November 2019 and September 2020 was measured using an acoustic Long Base Line (LBL) positioning system (LinkQuest Pinpoint). The position was recorded in the SPOT.ON survey systems software (OceanModulesTM). The track was smoothed from initial acoustic fixes and cleaned for most obvious outliers. The position is in a floe-fixed, relative coordinate system (X, Y) with the origin (X=0 m, Y=0 m) at the ROV hole. A quality flag for the position is introduced based on the time to the closest fix with “1” indicating good positon (fix reached 3s & 5s). Depending on the scientific aim, a position with quality flag “3” can still be useful. Vehicle depth was measured by the integrated pressure sensor and calibrated to 0 during pre-survey procedures, when the top side of the vehicle was at the same level as the water surface. Vehicle attitude (roll, pitch, heading) was measured with an onboard inertial measuring unit (IMU, Microstrain) with three axis accelerometer, magnetometer and gyroscope. Depth was measured by a pressure sensor (Keller A-21Y, Keller AG) included in the main electronics housing of the ROV. Horizontal position (X,Y):• Leg 1: Scale factors and offsets to successfully improve positions for surveys PS122_1_5_62_20191102_1 and PS122_1_6_16_20191105_1 were obtained by comparing positions of markers from the ROV and a terrestrial laser scanner (RIEGL). Scale factors and offsets for surveys PS122_1_6_31_20191106_1, PS122_1_6_118_20191110_1, PS122_1_7_18_20191112_1, PS122_1_7_55_20191113_1 are based on estimates but will be improved also using markers.• Leg 4: Positions for surveys PS122_4_48_213_20200726_1 and PS122_4_49_105_20200728_1 are partly distorted probably due to usage of drifting transponder(s) or erroneous transponder position configuration. Retrieving suitable scale factors and offsets was not successful so far.• Leg 5: probably due to drifting transponder(s). Retrieving suitable scale factors and offsets was not successful so far.

This layer details the movement of survey marks due to the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES). The movements include the impact of 5 major earthquakes on 4 September 2010, 22 February 2011, 13 June 2011, 23 December 2011 and 14 February 2016.

Note that these movements apply only at the survey mark. Nearby land may have moved differently, especially in areas impacted by substantial shallow ground movement.

For further earthquake information, see the Canterbury earthquake information on the LINZ website.

Scope

Movements do not include the regular tectonic movement (not related to earthquakes) of approximately 5cm per year.

As well as Christchurch, the data covers Lyttelton, Spencerville, Kaiapoi, Pines Beach, Woodend, Pegasus and Waikuku Beach.

Mark Movement Calculations

Observed mark movements have been calculated from geodetic and cadastral survey data collected at the same physical survey mark before and after the earthquakes. Various filters have been applied to ensure as far as practicable that the movements reflect real-world earthquake-related movements of marks. For example, only non-boundary marks that have been directly measured (rather than adopted) are included.

Modelled mark movements have been calculated using models of the tectonic-scale movements resulting from each earthquake, supplied by GNS Science, supplemented with more detailed modelling carried out by LINZ. These models typically represent deep-seated movement only. They do not include shallow movement, such as that resulting from liquefaction.

Therefore the difference between the post-earthquake observed and post-earthquake modelled position generally represents shallow ground movement. The difference between the post-earthquake modelled and pre-earthquake observed position generally represents deep-seated movement. The difference between the post-earthquake observed position and pre-earthquake observed position represents total movement due to the earthquakes.

Accuracy

The uncertainty of the coordinate changes is 0.1m at a 95% confidence interval.

Layer Attributes

• nod_id_post_eq: Landonline node id for the latest post-earthquake node (mark)
• code_post_eq: Geodetic code for the latest post-earthquake node
• name_post_eq: Mark name for the latest post-earthquake node
• nod_id_pre_eq: Landonline node id for the pre-earthquake node (mark)
• code_pre_eq: Geodetic code for the pre-earthquake node
• name_pre_eq: Mark name for the pre-earthquake node
• de_mod_obs: East change from modelled post-earthquake to observed post-earthquake position
• dn_mod_obs: North change from modelled post-earthquake to observed post-earthquake position
• hz_mod_obs: Horizontal change from modelled post-earthquake to observed post-earthquake position
• bg_mod_obs: Bearing from modelled post-earthquake to observed post-earthquake position
• de_pre_mod: East change from observed pre-earthquake to modelled post-earthquake position
• dn_pre_mod: North change from observed pre-earthquake to modelled post-earthquake position
• hz_pre_mod: Horizontal change from observed pre-earthquake to modelled post-earthquake position
• bg_pre_mod: Bearing from observed pre-earthquake to modelled post-earthquake position
• de_pre_obs: East change from observed pre-earthquake to observed post-earthquake position
• dn_pre_obs: North change from observed pre-earthquake to observed post-earthquake position
• hz_pre_obs: Horizontal change from observed pre-earthquake to observed post-earthquake position
• bg_pre_obs: Bearing from observed pre-earthquake to observed post-earthquake position

The Nova Scotia Control Monuments (NSCM) dataset is updated and maintained from ongoing observations on survey monuments. The NSCM indicates the locations of physical survey monuments in Nova Scotia. Information includes the Station Number, Station Name, Station Description, Monument Type, Monument Status, Status Date, Construction Date, GPS suitability and general comments.

This web mapping application is meant for public use. It displays the control monuments used in legal land surveys and includes NAD83 CSRS values in addition to the condition of the monuments. There are three types of survey monuments included; Conventional Survey monuments, GPS and High Precision GPS. Section 65 of the Newfoundland and Labrador Lands Act states:65. (1) A person who interrupts, molests or hinders a surveyor while in the discharge of his or her duties, or knowingly or willfully pulls down, defaces, alters or removes a mound, post, monument or control survey marker erected, planted or placed in a survey under this Part is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding $500 or imprisonment for a period not exceeding 3 months.

The horizontal position of the remotely operated vehicle (ROV) during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition between November 2019 and September 2020 was measured using an acoustic Long Base Line (LBL) positioning system (LinkQuest Pinpoint). The position was recorded in the SPOT.ON survey systems software (OceanModulesTM). The track was smoothed from initial acoustic fixes and cleaned for most obvious outliers. The position is in a floe-fixed, relative coordinate system (X, Y) with the origin (X=0 m, Y=0 m) at the ROV hole. A quality flag for the position is introduced based on the time to the closest fix with “1” indicating good positon (fix reached 3s & 5s). Depending on the scientific aim, a position with quality flag “3” can still be useful. Vehicle depth was measured by the integrated pressure sensor and calibrated to 0 during pre-survey procedures, when the top side of the vehicle was at the same level as the water surface. Vehicle attitude (roll, pitch, heading) was measured with an onboard inertial measuring unit (IMU, Microstrain) with three axis accelerometer, magnetometer and gyroscope. Depth was measured by a pressure sensor (Keller A-21Y, Keller AG) included in the main electronics housing of the ROV. Horizontal position (X,Y):• Leg 1: Scale factors and offsets to successfully improve positions for surveys PS122_1_5_62_20191102_1 and PS122_1_6_16_20191105_1 were obtained by comparing positions of markers from the ROV and a terrestrial laser scanner (RIEGL). Scale factors and offsets for surveys PS122_1_6_31_20191106_1, PS122_1_6_118_20191110_1, PS122_1_7_18_20191112_1, PS122_1_7_55_20191113_1 are based on estimates but will be improved also using markers.• Leg 4: Positions for surveys PS122_4_48_213_20200726_1 and PS122_4_49_105_20200728_1 are partly distorted probably due to usage of drifting transponder(s) or erroneous transponder position configuration. Retrieving suitable scale factors and offsets was not successful so far.• Leg 5: probably due to drifting transponder(s). Retrieving suitable scale factors and offsets was not successful so far.

The horizontal position of the remotely operated vehicle (ROV) during the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition between November 2019 and September 2020 was measured using an acoustic Long Base Line (LBL) positioning system (LinkQuest Pinpoint). The position was recorded in the SPOT.ON survey systems software (OceanModulesTM). The track was smoothed from initial acoustic fixes and cleaned for most obvious outliers. The position is in a floe-fixed, relative coordinate system (X, Y) with the origin (X=0 m, Y=0 m) at the ROV hole. A quality flag for the position is introduced based on the time to the closest fix with “1” indicating good positon (fix reached 3s & 5s). Depending on the scientific aim, a position with quality flag “3” can still be useful. Vehicle depth was measured by the integrated pressure sensor and calibrated to 0 during pre-survey procedures, when the top side of the vehicle was at the same level as the water surface. Vehicle attitude (roll, pitch, heading) was measured with an onboard inertial measuring unit (IMU, Microstrain) with three axis accelerometer, magnetometer and gyroscope. Depth was measured by a pressure sensor (Keller A-21Y, Keller AG) included in the main electronics housing of the ROV. Horizontal position (X,Y):• Leg 1: Scale factors and offsets to successfully improve positions for surveys PS122_1_5_62_20191102_1 and PS122_1_6_16_20191105_1 were obtained by comparing positions of markers from the ROV and a terrestrial laser scanner (RIEGL). Scale factors and offsets for surveys PS122_1_6_31_20191106_1, PS122_1_6_118_20191110_1, PS122_1_7_18_20191112_1, PS122_1_7_55_20191113_1 are based on estimates but will be improved also using markers.• Leg 4: Positions for surveys PS122_4_48_213_20200726_1 and PS122_4_49_105_20200728_1 are partly distorted probably due to usage of drifting transponder(s) or erroneous transponder position configuration. Retrieving suitable scale factors and offsets was not successful so far.• Leg 5: probably due to drifting transponder(s). Retrieving suitable scale factors and offsets was not successful so far.

Last Rev. 01/24/08 - E.Foster, P.E. - FSU/BSRCThe Historic Shoreline Database on the Web contains many directories of related types of information about beach changes in Florida over the past 150 or so years. The historic shoreline map images (see the Drawings directory) show precision-digitized approximate mean high water (mhw) shorelines, from the US government coastal topographic maps listed in the associated map bibliography files (see the Sourcebibs directory). These generally show data extending from the mid to late 1800’s to the mid to late 1970’s. The mhw positions have been extracted and tabulated (see the MWHfiles directory) relative to fixed reference “R” points along the beach, spaced approximately 1000 feet (300 meters) apart. Reference points not actually corresponding to actual “in the ground” survey markers are virtual “V” points. Mean high water positions have been and continue to be extracted from FDEP beach profile surveys from the 1970’s through the present and added to the tables. The beach profile data files from which mhw data have been extracted and added into the mhw tables can be found in the ProfileData directory and visually (for many areas) in the ClickOnProfiles directory. The beach profile files include elevation information along the entire length of the profiles. This profile data set has undergone up to fifteen additional quality control checks to ensure accuracy, reliability, and consistency with the historic database coordinate and bearing set. Note that any data deeper than wading depth have not yet undergone any extra quality control checks. Note also that there are *.cod text files of notes associated with the review of the profile data files.The digital historic shoreline map image files are given in a DWG autocad-based format, which should be usable on most versions, as well as many GIS systems. The Florida State Plane 1927/79-adjusted and 1983/90 horizontal coordinate systems are used. These are not metric systems, but with the proper software can be converted to whatever systems you may need. Each map image DWG file contains many layers, documented in an ASCII layer list archived with the DWG file.The database has been maintained and greatly expanded by E. Foster since approximately 1987 and by N. Nguyen since 1995. The initial map digitizing effort was done for FDEP at Florida State University, primarily by S. Demirpolat. Final processing and editing of the original map files to make them user-friendly was performed by N. Nguyen and E. Foster in 1995-7. Extensive quality control and update work has been performed by E. Foster since 1987, and by N. Nguyen since 1995. Field profile surveys have been performed by the FDEP Coastal Data Acquisition section since the early 1970’s, and by a number of commercial surveyors in recent years.The formats of the mhw tables and profile files are explained in text files included in the respective directories.Note that the digitized map image files were originally created in the UTM coordinate system on Intergraph equipment. The translation from UTM to the State Plane coordinate systems has resulted in some minor textual and other visual shifts in the northwest Florida area map image files.The dates in the map legends in the map images are generally composite dates. It is necessary to use the mhw data tables and map bibliographies for accurate dates for any specific location. The date ranges in the data tables relate to specific information given in the map bibliography files.2Generally it may be assumed that the historic shorelines have been digitized as carefully as possible from the source maps. If a historic shoreline does not contain a systematic position error and is feasible in a physical sense, the accuracy of the mhw position is estimated at plus or minus 15 to 50 feet (5 to 15 m), depending on the source and scale. This is as a position in time, NOT as an average mhw position. Data added from field surveys are estimated at plus or minus 10 feet (3 m) or better.It is to be noted that from the 1920’s onward, aerial photographs have usually been the basis of the US government’s coastal topographic maps. Prior to that, the method was plane table surveying. Along higher wave energy coasts, especially the Florida east coast, if there was significant wave activity in the source photography, it is very possible that the mhw was mapped in a more landward location than was probably correct. Alternatively, the use of photography sets with excessive sun glare may have caused the mhw to be mapped in a more seaward location than was probably correct. These effects have been frequently observed in comparisons of close-in-time FDEP controlled aerial photography with FDEP profile surveys. The use of some photography sets containing high wave uprush or sun glare is probable within the historic data. For example, on the east coast the 1940’s series maps tend to show the mhw more seaward than expected, possibly due to sun glare, and the 1960’s series tend to show the mhw more landward than expected. In the latter case, the effect may be due to the 1960’s being a decade of frequent storms. It is recommended that the analyst be aware that some of these effects may exist in the historic data. A questionable historic shoreline is NOT necessarily one to be discarded, just considered with allowance for its’ potential limitations.Using this database, it can readily be observed that the historic trends in shoreline evolution are very consistent with behavior expected from the longshore transport equation, well known to coastal engineers. This is a non-linear equation. Shoreline change can be expected to be linear or constant only in certain situations. It is NOT recommended that any analyst arbitrarily assume constant or linear shoreline change rates over long periods of time, which is often done but not supported by the evidence. The three primary factors controlling shoreline change are sand supply, wave climate, and local geographic features. In some parts of Florida, major storms since 1995 have also become important factors.