#TEMPORARY ACCESSION NUMBER:


#ACCESSION NUMBER:


#CONTRIBUTOR:
Dr. Paul Jokiel
Dr. Ku'ulei Rodgers
Mr. Eric K. Brown

#CONTRIBUTOR INSTITUTION:
Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology
Department Of Oceanograhpy
School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology
University Of Hawaii 
P.O. Box 1346  
Kaneohe, HI 96744 USA

#ORIGINATOR:
same

#ORIGINATOR INSTITUTION:
same

#TITLE: 
Hawaii Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program (CRAMP):
Benthic Data from 2002-2004

#PROJECT: Coral Reef Assessment and Monitoring Program 

Funding and support:
Hawaii Coral Reef Initiative
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service
United States Geological Survey
State of Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of
Aquatic Resources
Kahoolawe Island Reserve Commission
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Coastal Program
Limahuli National Botanical Garden
Save Our Seas

COOPERATIVE PROGRAMS
CRAMP is primarily a major state-wide partnership between the State of Hawaii
Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), Division of Aquatic Resources
(DAR) and the University of Hawaii System.

The Management Committee of the Hawaii Coral Reef Initiative (HCRI) that makes
the decisions on CRAMP funding consists of two UH members, two DAR members and
one outside member.  DAR staff on all islands were involved in the design of
CRAMP and have been directly involved with site selection. A number of DAR
biologists and other staff throughout the State (notably Skippy Hau, Russ
Sparks, Bill Walsh, Brent Carman, Pete Hendricks, Don Heacock and Dave Eckert)
have been directly involved in the survey work. CRAMP work on the outer
islands is facilitated by Dr. Robert Nishimoto of DAR.

CRAMP is based at the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology (HIMB), but operates
through the statewide UH system. On Oahu, this involves the Departments of
Botany, Zoology, Oceanography, Geology and Geography at UH Manoa. Dr. Dave
Krupp at UH Windward Community College (WCC) in involved in surveys of Kaneohe
Bay and supports the CRAMP web server. John Pye at UH Maui Community College
participates directly in surveys and has served as PI on the portion of CRAMP
work at Maui and Kahoolawe.  Donna Brown of WCC and the Marine Option Program
(MOP) are fully involved in CRAMP surveys and analysis of digital survey
images. CRAMP has received substantial support from Dr. Leon Hallacher and
John Coney of the University of Hawaii at Hilo that has enabled us to survey
sites on the Island of Hawaii.

#ABSTRACT:
This dataset consists of CRAMP surveys taken in 2002-2004 and includes 
quantitative estimates of substrate and species type.  From the data
percent coverage of a given species can be estimated.  The types and coverages 
were derived objectively from photographic images using PhotoGrid, a 
software package which analyzes random points on images of coral reefs 
and substrate. This dataset does not include the images from video 
transects or photoquadrats however these have been provided to NOAA separately.
Fish transects were discontinued after 2002.

In 2002, there were 57 lines surveyed at 28 sites.  Due to funding cuts,
the number of surveys dropped in 2003 and 2004.  There were 8 surveys
provided to NODC for 2003 and 5 in 2004.  A few more surveys during this
time period could become available at a later date.  Surveys 
typically consist of shallow (~3m) and deep (~10m) lines.

#PURPOSE:
To understand the ecology of Hawaiian coral reefs in relation to other 
geographic areas and to monitor change at each given site.

CRAMP experimental design allows detection of changes that can be attributed
to various factors such as:

  overuse (over-fishing, anchor damage, aquarium trade
  collection, etc.), sedimentation, nutrient loading,
  catastrophic natural events (storm wave impact, lava
  flows), coastal construction, urbanization, global warming
  (bleaching), introduced species, algal invasions, and fish
  and invertebrate diseases.

The emphasis of the program is on the major problems facing Hawaiian coral
reefs as listed by managers and reef scientists during workshops and meetings
held in Hawaii (1997-1998). These are: 

  over-fishing,
  sedimentation,
  eutrophication, and
  algal outbreaks.

CRAMP experimental design gives priority to areas where baseline data relevant 
to these issues were previously collected. Transect dimensions, number of 
replicates, and methods of evaluation have been selected to detect changes 
with statistical confidence. Standard techniques include the establishment of 
permanent transects to quantify fish, coral, algae, and invertebrates at study sites. 

CRAMP researchers are quantifying changes that have occurred on coral reefs
subjected to varying degrees of fishing pressure, sedimentation,
eutrophication, and algal growth and are conducting experimental work in
order to test hypotheses concerning the role of these environmental factors
in the ecology of coral reefs. We are also in the process of resurveying,
updating and integrating existing ecological information on an array of coral
reefs that have been designated as areas of concern or, "hot spots," by
managers and scientists. 

#LOCATION EXTREMES:
SOUTHERNMOST LATITUDE:  19.5118
SOUTHERNMOST LATITUDE HEMISPHERE: N
NORTHERNMOST LATITUDE:  22.2109
NORTHERNMOST LATITUDE HEMISPHERE: N
WESTERNMOST LONGITUDE: 159.7273
WESTERNMOST LONGITUDE HEMISPHERE: W 
EASTERNMOST LONGITUDE: 155.0171 
EASTERNMOST LONGITUDE HEMISPHERE: W  

#LOCATION KEYWORDS: Kauai, Oahu, Maui, Kahoolawe, Hawaii, North Pacific Ocean

#SAMPLING STATIONS:
                                                         
SITE       LAT        LONG    DEPTH   ISLAND     SITE   Survey year
CODE                            (M)              NAME   (2002-4) 
HaKpn04m 19 16.198 155 53.626  4.00  Hawaii    Kaapuna  *not surveyed
HaKpn10m 19 16.198 155 53.649 10.00  Hawaii    Kaapuna  2002

HaLaa03m 19 35.??? 155 58.??? 10.00  Hawaii    Laaloa   2002
HaLaa10m 19 35.348 155 58.377 10.00  Hawaii    Laaloa   2002

HaLau03m 19 59.392 155 14.056  3.00  Hawaii    Laupahoehoe 2002
HaLau10m 19 59.461 155 14.027 10.00  Hawaii    Laupahoehoe 2002

HaLel03m 19 44.133 155 01.028  3.00  Hawaii    Leleiwi    2002
HaLel10m 19 44.162 155 01.032 10.00  Hawaii    Leleiwi   2002

HaKaw03m 20 01.790 155 50.150  3.00  Hawaii    Kawaihae   2002
HaKaw10m 20 01.790 155 50.150 10.00  Hawaii    Kawaihae   2002

HaNen05m 19 30.733 155 57.473  5.00  Hawaii    Nenue Pt.  2002
HaNen10m 19 30.708 155 57.504 10.00  Hawaii    Nenue Pt.  2002

KaHan03m 22 12.656 159 30.727  3.00  Kauai     Hanalei   2002,2004
KaHan08m 22 12.703 159 30.721 10.00  Kauai     Hanalei  2002,2004

KaHoa03m 21 52.775 159 28.452  3.00  Kauai     Hoai      2002
KaHoa10m 21 52.697 159 28.477 10.00  Kauai     Hoai     2002

KaLim01m 22 13.489 159 34.755  1.00  Kauai     Limahuli 2002,2004
KaLim10m 22 13.544 159 34.755 10.00  Kauai     Limahuli 2002,2004

KaMil03m 22 08.778 159 43.562  3.00  Kauai     Milolii 2002
KaMil10m 22 08.827 159 43.637 10.00  Kauai     Milolii 2002

KaNua03m 22 09.641 159 42.102  3.00  Kauai     Nualolo Kai 2002
KaNua10m 22 09.940 159 42.288 10.00  Kauai     Nualolo Kai 2002

KeHak03m 20 35.551 156 33.064  3.00  Kahoolawe Hakioawa not surveyed
KeHak10m 20 35.569 156 33.050 10.00  Kahoolawe Hakioawa not surveyed

MaHoN03m 21 00.923 156 38.343  3.00  Maui      Honolua    2002
                                               North      

MaHoS03m 21 00.831 156 38.380  3.00  Maui      Honolua    2002     
                                               South 

MaKaB01m 20 37.049 156 26.241  1.00  Maui     Kanehena Bay 2002
MaKaB03m 20 37.015 156 26.301  3.00  Maui     Kanehena Bay 2002

MaKaP03m 20 36.089 156 26.214  3.00  Maui     Kanehena Pt. 2002
MaKaP10m 20 36.070 156 26.280 10.00  Maui     Kanehena Pt. 2002

MaKah03m 20 56.257 156 41.595  3.00  Maui      Kahekili    2002
MaKah07m 20 56.274 156 41.623  7.00  Maui      Kahekili   2002

MaMaa03m 20 47.378 156 30.607  3.00  Maui      Maalaea not surveyed
MaMaa06m 20 47.332 156 30.596  6.00  Maui      Maalaea not surveyed

MaMol08m 20 37.889 156 29.795  8.00  Maui      Molokini  2002
MaMol13m 20 37.940 156 29.783 13.00  Maui      Molokini  2002

MaOlo03m 20 48.505 156 36.693  3.00  Maui      Olowalu   2002
MaOlo07m 20 48.363 156 36.733  7.00  Maui      Olowalu  2002

MaPap04m 20 55.307 156 25.572  4.00  Maui      Papaula Pt.not surveyed
MaPap10m 20 55.462 156 25.571 10.00  Maui      Papaula Pt.not surveyed

MaPua03m 20 51.369 156 40.033  3.00  Maui      Puamana  2002 
MaPua13m 20 51.322 156 40.111 13.00  Maui      Puamana  2002 

MoKma03m 21 04.179 157 00.014  3.00  Molokai   Kamilioloa  2002 
MoKma10m 21 04.090 157 00.055 10.00  Molokai   Kamilioloa 2002 

MoKmo03m 21 02.496 156 53.837  3.00  Molokai   Kamalo     2002 
MoKmo10m 21 02.248 156 53.854 10.00  Molokai   Kamalo      2002 

MoPal03m 21 05.352 157 06.460  3.00  Molokai   Palaau    2002 
MoPal10m 21 05.223 157 06.510 10.00  Molokai   Palaau   2002 

OaHan03m 21 16.113 157 41.700  3.00  Oahu      Hanauma Bay 2002
OaHan10m 21 16.055 157 41.643 10.00  Oahu      Hanauma Bay 2002

OaHee02m 21 26.884 157 48.548  2.00  Oahu      Heeia  2002,2003
OaHee08m 21 26.884 157 48.547  8.00  Oahu      Heeia  2002,2003

OaKpi03m 21 22.391 158 08.553  3.00  Oahu      Kahe     2002
                                               (Pili O)
OaKpo03m 21 21.396 158 07.974  3.00  Oahu      Kahe Point  2002

OaKaa02m 21 28.391 157 49.851  2.00  Oahu      Kaalaea    2002,2003
OaKaa08m 21 28.609 157 49.848  8.00  Oahu      Kaalaea   2002,2003

OaMok02m 21 26.209 157 47.223  2.00  Oahu      Moku o Loe  2002,2003
OaMok09m 21 26.221 157 47.221  9.00  Oahu      Moku o Loe 2002,2003

OaPup04m 21 40.525 158 02.597  4.00  Oahu      Pupukea   2002
OaPup08m 21 40.628 158 02.712  8.00  Oahu      Pupukea  2002
OaPup09m 21 40.628 158 02.712  8.00  Oahu      Pupukea 2002

OaAla03m 21.16.868 157.50.775       Oahu      Ala Wai  2003
OaAla10m 21.16.786 157.50.825       Oahu      Ala Wai  2003

Notes, 
1) OaKaa = OaWai (originally Waiahole,)

#BEGIN AND END DATES: 
20020327 - 20040907

#SAMPLING PERIODS:
for 2002 see data/2002/access/tblSurvey.csv or xls
for 2003-2004, see data/2003_4/CRAMP Survey dates 2003,2004.csv or xls

#PARAMETERS: 
substrate type
taxa name and code
corals and algae percent coverage

#METHODOLOGY:
CRAMP Protocol
One of the major objectives of the CRAMP program during the first year was to
establish a sampling protocol that could detect change in coral cover over
time with sufficient statistical power (P>0.8). The first step involved the
evaluation of historical methods to determine if any of these procedures
could be incorporated into the CRAMP protocol. After careful analysis it was
determined that only the fixed photoquadrats utilized by Dr. Steve Coles at
Bishop Museum had sufficient power. The method, which samples a relatively
small area, is suitable to address small-scale questions on coral growth,
recruitment and mortality, but inference on general reef condition is
difficult across broader sections of reef. 

The second step involved soliciting input from colleagues conducting coral
reef monitoring programs in the Florida Keys and the Great Barrier Reef.
Their general recommendation was to use digital video to sample coral cover
over large areas of the reef. Before we could implement their designs,
however, we had to evaluate the appropriateness of these techniques for
Hawai`i. The following parameters in the sampling design were determined in
the third step: 

  1.Repeatability and appropriate length of the transects using different
     methods
  2.Observer variation within different methods
  3.Number of points per frame to analyze
  4.Number of frames per transect to analyze
  5.Number of transects per depth to sample
  6.Random versus fixed transects
  7.Time and monetary considerations to optimize sampling design

The results of this evaluation were presented at the National Coral Reef
Institute Conference in Florida and are summarized by the CRAMP research team
(Brown, et al. 1999). Repeatability and appropriate transect length were
tested using photoquadrats on a transect line sampled over a short time
interval. Shorter transects of 10m were found to have higher precision
(Ability to replicate quadrats on a transect) than transects of 25m and 50m.
Photoquadrats produced similar results to visual estimation techniques,
regardless of observer, but neither method yielded satisfactory precision. 

Digital video was evaluated at Hanauma Bay, Oahu over 2 time intervals
separated by 84 days. It was assumed that overall coral cover would not
change dramatically during this time period. Power curves were constructed
using methods described by Zar (1999) for detecting a 10% change in coral
cover across 2 time periods (Figure 1). Number of frames was more important
in increasing power than number of points though the difference was not
substantial. This is primarily due to the fact that more frames sample a
larger portion of the habitat, which incorporates more of the heterogeneity
of the substrate. A sample size of 10 transects per site appeared to be
adequate for characterizing the coral cover using a power value of 0.8 set as
a convention by Cohen (1988). 

Fixed transects were chosen over random for several reasons. First, it is
difficult to properly implement a randomized protocol for transect placement
without a map of benthic habitats that is geo-referenced. At present this
does not exist for the state of Hawai`i. Second, the majority of the
historical data uses fixed transect locations so integrating the current
protocol with previous work will be simpler. Third, after the initial random
setup the fixed transects should be easier to resample, thus reducing
preparation time and ultimately costs to generate the random grid for
subsequent transect measurements (Green and Smith, 1997). Fourth, randomized
sampling of transects will have difficulty in detecting change in coral cover
if reefs change dramatically over time. This is because the random protocol
measures inherent spatial variation at each sampling period, which adds
variance associated with spatial heterogeneity of the reef rather than
changes or patterns that are time-related (Green and Smith, 1997). Fifth,
using a repeated measures ANOVA design with fixed transects can provide
additional information on population and community structure that is
difficult to obtain with random transects (Hughes, 1996; Connell et al.
1997). Sixth, the time and cost complications with random transects are not
worth the broader inference about reef "condition" especially if the fixed
transects are representative of habitat variation (Andy Taylor, personal
communication). Finally, interpreting results from fixed transects is much
easier for the general public and resource managers to comprehend than using
a randomized sampling design.

Time and monetary constraints were examined to determine the optimum sampling
protocol. The analysis revealed that digital video collected more data per
unit time than visual estimation, planar point intercept and photoquadrats.
It was the most expensive option considered at $5,500 for the system but
since field time underwater is the principal limiting factor then the
quantity of field data collected outweighs the expense. In addition, digital
video and photoquadrats also enable archiving of the data for later
re-analysis to address additional questions. 

Based on the results from the evaluation procedure we have selected 2 methods
to address changes in overall coral cover and growth, recruitment and
mortality of benthic organisms. Digital video will be used to measure changes
in coral cover by initially selecting at random, ten permanent (fixed)
transects at 2 depths (3m and 10m). Each transect will be 10m in length and
analyzed using 20 randomly selected video frames with 50 randomly selected
points per frame. Frequency of sampling will be once a year at each site.
This should be sufficient to detect a 10% change in coral cover over time
with high statistical power across of variety of habitats in Hawai`i. 

The second method will employ fixed photoquadrats to examine trends of
individual organisms with regards to growth, recruitment and mortality. Five
haphazardly selected photoquadrats at each depth contour will be established
with 4 pins at each corner to ensure accurate repositioning of the frame. The
frame dimension will sample 0.33 m2 of the substrate at a height of 0.5m from
the bottom. Images of sessile organisms will be traced and digitized for 2D
estimates of aerial coverage. Sampling will be scheduled once a year at each
site in concordance with the digital video surveys. 

Site Survey Protocol

Two types of protocol are utilized by CRAMP: Monitoring Protocol and
Assessment Protocol.  This submission to NOAA only includes data taken
using the Monitoring Protocol.  The Assessment Protocol is simply an 
abbreviated version of the Monitoring Protocol.  The Assessment Protocol 
is a rapid method that is most useful for describing spatial relationships.
The Assessment Protocol lacks the statistical power of the Monitoring 
Protocol to detect change in the benthos.  The Assessment Protocol is a more
cost-effective method for answering certain questions on the status of coral
reefs.

Monitoring Protocol - General Description

Installing the fixed monitoring sites is a process that was generally
completed by a team of six divers during a single dive.  All primary sites
have been installed.  The initial monitoring of a given site was generally
initiated at some time after installation.  More detail on installation is
discussed under the section on Benthic Monitoring.  Upon reaching an
established monitoring site site a number of tasks must be performed.  CRAMP
generally surveys one site (3 m and 10 m transect locations at each site)
per day with a team of 6 divers. The deeper site is surveyed in the morning,
the shallow site in the afternoon after a proper surface interval. The
beginning of the transect is located by visual lineups and/or GPS by skin
divers and marked with a dive flag to alert boaters of our presence and
enable quick location by the divers. Subsequent SCUBA teams entering the
water take materials needed for the survey (spooled transect tapes, rugosity
chain, video camera, photo-quadrat apparatus, extra marker pins, etc) and
deposit the material near the start of the transect for use by the teams
during the dive.

The first SCUBA team to enter the water consists of two divers: the person
doing the fish survey and a back-up diver who stays within visual range and
photographs the fixed photo-quadrats as the fish survey proceeds. Estimates
of fish species richness, abundance, and biomass are taken before the
benthic transect lines are laid out so as to sample a relatively undisturbed
habitat. The standard CRAMP fish transect is taken along a depth contour
within the CRAMP grid of benthic transects, and consists of four, 5x25m
transects that are separated by 5m. The scientist doing the fish survey
counts fish while deploying a 25 m line behind him/her. As the survey
proceeds, two more SCUBA divers enter the water. One of the pair starts
video taping the replicate benthic transects while the second deploys the
transect tapes and records species information on the corals/algae located
along each transect for later reference. The third team of two divers
follows the video transect team and measures rugosity under the replicate
transects. Upon completion of the fish transect, the first dive team
completes the photo-quadrats.  As other teams complete their work they
return to the start of the transect and begin taking up the transect tapes.

During the survey, various divers complete additional functions. These
include taking sediment samples, stabilizing or replacing lose transect
pins, routine photography of organisms, description of habitats, making
algae collections or various activities.

The same procedure is carried out at the shallow site during the afternoon.
In addition, at various times of the day (depending on time availability)
two members of the group will skin dive with a dive flag and water proof GPS
unit while describing and recording habitat distribution throughout the
study site for later mapping efforts.

Benthic Monitoring

The basic unit for long term CRAMP monitoring is a 100 m x 3 m transect
corridor that follows a depth contour.  The transect is divided into a grid
of 1 m intervals along its length by 0.5 m intervals along its width. 
Stainless steel pins are driven along the length of the central line or
"spine" (shown in yellow on diagram below) to serve as the reference point
for installation of the 10 transects and five photoquadrats.  The spine pins
are marked by slipping a short length of plastic tubing over the pin to
identify the pin as a "spine" pin.  In addition, the first spine pin (0 m)
is marked with a single cable tie, the fifth pin (50 m) is marked with two
cable ties and the tenth pin (100 m) is marked with three cable ties. 

Video Transect and Digital Still Methods:

1. Field Recording

Data are taken using a Sony DCR-TRV900 Mini DV camcorder enclosed in an
Amphibico VHDB0900 Dive Buddy Housing. During early 2000 we added a Quest
Aqua-Lite dual head U/W video light system.  

The videographer follows the following procedure:
    While on the surface, the diver videotapes the landmark "line-ups" used
to locate the site. These serve to identify the tape if there is any
question of proper labeling. Also, the images can be frame-grabbed and
subsequently printed and laminated for use when relocating the site. In many
cases the use of landmarks is faster and more convenient than using the GPS
position to relocate the transect site. The diver then goes to the bottom
and videotapes a full 360 degree panorama of the site as part of the
permanent video record. The diver proceeds to the start of the first 10 m
transect and records the transect number on the video through use of hand
signals in front of the camera (number of fingers representing transect
no.). The videographer then moves slowly (4 min per transect) along the 10 m
transect while videotaping the bottom at a distance of 0.5 m. Initially a
rod attached to the camera was used to insure proper distance from the
bottom. This has been replaced with two small underwater lasers that cross
at 0.5 m, allowing the videographer to hold the distance constant by keeping
an overlap on the two red laser dots. Each of the 10 transects along the 100
m spine line is recorded in this manner. One digital videotape (1 hour tape)
is used to capture 10 transects.

Digital stills replaced video transects in 2004.  20 images were taken per
transect or 200 images per survey line.

2. Laboratory Data Analysis

PointCount99 was replaced with PhotoGrid starting in 2002.
PhotoGrid was designed for CRAMP to output data in a PointCount format.  They
should be fully compatible except many of the categories are not applicable
(N/A).  The methodology of PhotoGrid software is similar to PointCount99.

Each transect is 10 m in length. Twenty non-overlapping video frames or still 
images are selected and processed using Photogrid software to
develop estimates for coral and substrate types. The statistical data
analysis includes a repeated measures ANOVA design with nesting of transects
in depth where frames per transect are treated as sub-samples along a
transect.

#INSTRUMENT TYPES:
SCUBA
transect tape
digital camera

#REFERENCES: 
Brown, E, E Cox, B Tissot, K Rodgers, and W Smith (1999). Evaluation of
   benthic sampling methods considered for the Coral Reef Assessment and
   Monitoring Program (CRAMP) in Hawaii. International Conference on
   Scientific Aspects of Coral Reef Assessment, Monitoring, and Restoration.
   April 14-16, Ft. Lauderdale, FL.
 
Connell, J H, T P Hughes, C C Wallace (1997). A 30-year study of coral abundance,
   recruitment, and disturbance at several scales in space and time. Ecol. Mono.
   67(4): 461-488.

Friedlander, Alan and Parrish, James  1998.  Habitat characteristics
   affecting fish assemblages on a Hawaiian coral reef. Journal of Experimental
   Marine Biology and Ecology 224: 1-30.
 
Green, R H and S R Smith (1997). Sample program design and environmental impact
   assessment on coral reef. Proc 8th International Coral Reef Symposium.
   2: 1459-1464.

McCormick, Mark  1994.  Comparison of field methods for measuring surface
   topography and their associations with a tropical reef fish assemblage.
   Marine Ecology Progress Series 112: 87-96.

#SUBMITTING MEDIUM:
cdrom

#FILE FORMATS: 

Directories separate for year 2002 and years 2003-2004
1. data/2002

  CSV (ASCII) output from the PhotoGrid for all surveyed lines.

Filename template:

yyIISDDmyyyymmdd.csv

where: yy: last two digits of year
       II: Island (Ka Kauai, Oa Oahu, Mo Molokai, Ma Maui, Ha Hawaii)
       S: site
       DD: depth
       m: always "m", meters
       yyyymmdd: survey date

Fields in these files:
Site Name - usually NA (not available)
Station - usually NA
Frame No - usually NA
Image Date - usually NA, get survey (image) date from filename
ID Name - equivalent to TaxonName in PointCount99, this is the species
          recorded but for some organisms if not identifiable to the 
          species or even genus level then just to taxanomic level
ID Code - usually NA

The following are PhotoGrid parameters equivalent to PointCount parameters
of the same name.
Point - Point number on the frame
X - X coordinate on the image for each point
Y - Y coordinate on the image for each point
Intensity - value for the point
Red - RGB value on the image
Green - RGB value on the image
Blue - RGB value on the image

Notes from Kuulei Rodgers concerning these paramters:
"Point X and Y are the coodinates for each of the 50 points that are generated
on an image.  This way if you want to go back and check if it is correct or
what someone called some organism it will regenerate the frame with the random
points that were originally used.  If for example you see Pavona maldivensis
and want to see if that is correct because you don't think it is at that site
and may have been interpreted, you can go back and look at point #7 to see
what is under it.  The program will use the coordinates to reconstruct the
original random points on that frame.   Red, Green
and Blue are just the exact colors as the person who first did the analysis
saw it.  Since you can adjust the color balance and the contrast, the program
saves the adjustments so it can be revisited if need be later."

Filename - this is a critical parameter.  It is the name of the image file.
           Convention is yyIISSSDDmTTFFF,
           yy : last two digits of year
           II : island
           SSS : site (see #STATIONS above)
           DDm : depth in meters
           TT : transect number
           FFF : frame number

The remaining parameters can be ignored and are usally NA:
Total Points,ID Date,Site ID,Site Code,Time Code,Institution,User
Name,Habitat,WQS,Length,Depth

Potential frequently asked question:
 -The CRAMP website lists available benthic data parameters: coral and
  substrate cover.  Can these be derived from the PhotoGrid data given? 
  How?  

Reply from Ku'ulei Rodgers:
    We use ACCESS, a relational database that calculates these for us
but it can be done in EXCEL as well by sorting alphabetically and deriving a
percent of the total for each substrate type.  For example if you have 10
points that are Porites compressa and there are 20 frames with 50 points on
each, this would be 10 out of 1000 points for the whole transect so 1% cover.
This is then done for each substrate type.  Then all the coral species
percentages are added together for a total coral cover number.

Within directory data/2002, there is a directory access/, which
contains MS Excel spreadsheets that were made from various MS Access
tables and queries.  Redundant CSV files were made of each.  Data are
from 1999-2002.  Files are:

Filename                       Comments
qryTaxonList.xls             Taxon Name, Family, Species Code, synonym, Common
                             Name, Hawaiian Name, Trophic, Endemic, mobility
qryTaxonList.csv             ASCII copy

tblCoralSummary.xls          Year, Site, Transect, Frame, Total of Taxon,
                             Specific counts for taxa types, Total Coral
tblCoralSummary.csv          ASCII copy

tblSite.xls                  SiteID, Island, Site, SiteName, Depth, Depth Code,
                             Latitude, Longitude, Status, ReserveSize
tblSite.csv                  ASCII copy

tblSurvey.xls                SurveyID, SiteID, Survey, Date, Year
tblSurvey.csv                ASCII copy

tblTaxon.xls                 TaxonID, TaxonIDCode, Type, Family, SpeciesCode,
                             TaxonName, synonym, Hawaiian Name, Common Name,
                             Trophic, Endemic, Mobility
tblTaxon.csv                 ASCII copy

2. data/2003_4

These are output from PhotoGrid as CSV files.  Format same as
described for the 2002 above.

Files                         Comments
03OaAla03m.CSV                Ala Wai, Oahu, 30 Nov 2003, 3m 
03OaAla10m.csv                same, 10m

03OaHee02m.CSV                Heeia, Oahu, 03 Oct 2003, 2m
03OaHee08m.CSV                same, 8m

03OaMok03m.CSV                Moku o loe, Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, 23 Oct 2003, 3m
03OaMok08m.CSV                same, 8m

03OaWai02m.CSV                Waiahole (Kaalaea), Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, 
                              26 Sep 2003, 2m
03OaWai8m.CSV                 same, 8m

04KaHan03m.CSV                Hanalei, Kauai, 06 Sep 2004, 3m
04KaHan04m.CSV                same, 4m
04KaHan08m.CSV                same, 8m

04KaLim.CSV                   Limahuli, Kauai, 07 Sep 2004, all depths

04 Kamalo.CSV                 Kamalo, Molokai, 10 Mar 2004,  all depths
04 Kamiloloa.CSV              Kamiloloa, Molokai, 12 Mar 2004, all depths
04 Palaau.CSV                 Palaau, Molokai, 11 Mar 2004, all depths

#DATASET SIZE:
110556 Kbytes

#NUMBER OF DATA UNITS:
29 sites

#MISCELLANEOUS:
Related data archived by NOAA:
NODC Accession             Comment
0000513                    CRAMP 1999 Coral (benthic) data
0000757                    CRAMP 1999-2000 Coral (benthic) data 
0000969                    CRAMP 1999-2000 Coral (benthic) data 
0000758                    CRAMP 1999-2000 Fish data
0000671                    CRAMP video images 1999
0000728                    CRAMP video images 2000
0000961                    CRAMP video images 2002
0001115                    CRAMP photoquadrat images 1999-2002
0001732                    CRAMP video images 2003

