In response to concerns over environmental quality of the Nation's coastal and estuarine ecosystems, NOAA created the National Status and Trends (NS&T) Program in 1984. The NS&T Mussel Watch Project began in 1986 to monitor concentrations of trace and major elements and organic contaminants in bivalve mollusks and sediments. This document reports information regarding the nominal sampling locations as provided in NOAA's Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 112, 1997, which can be found at http://www.ccma.nos.noaa.gov/publications/tm112.pdf. The SITES data file reports information regarding the nominal sampling locations designated by the NS&T Program. One record is presented per site. Each record reports the four-letter site acronym, general and specific location information, state abbreviation, state name, degree-minute-second coordinates, decimal degree coordinates, and species information, among other things. The actual site coordinate information is recorded at the time of sampling, if samples were taken at a location other than the nominal site center. The four-letter acronym is based on both the general location information and more specific location information (e.g. SFSM is San Francisco-San Mateo Bridge). The file also contains sequence numbers that facilitate geographic manipulation of the data. Sites are numbered sequentially from the northern most site on the U.S. East coast (i.e. Penobscott Bay-Pickering Island) and continue clockwise around the country.
The main objectives of the Mussel Watch Project are: (1) to evaluate the ecological status of the estuaries and coasts of the US (2) and to determine change in environmental quality through time (trends). This work is performed along the conterminous coasts of the US and the shores of the Great Lakes, Hawaii and Alaska. Samples are also regularly collected in Puerto Rico. Mussels and oysters are the sentinel species of the Project and collected and analyzed biennially with contaminants characterized in sediment approximately once every ten years. Mussels are collected from sites historically collected by state monitoring programs and forerunners of the current Project. The Projectâ??s data are available back to 1986 but certain parameters can be compared to early monitoring of the 1960s and 1970s.
Samples were collected by NOAA and by laboratories under contract to NOAA. Samples were analyzed by a number of laboratories including: Battelle, SAIC, the Geochemical Environmental Research Group of Texas A&M University and TDI-Brooks, Inc. The National Status and Trends Program were responsible for final assembly and review of all data. The SITES data file reports information regarding the nominal sampling locations designated by the National Status and Trends Program. The actual yearly locations are reported in the Mussel Watch Station file.
publication date
The National Status and Trends Program (NS&T) requests that all individuals who download (NS&T) data acknowledge the source of these data in any reports, papers, or presentations. If you publish these data, please include a statement similar to: "Some or all of the data described in this article were produced by NOAA through its National Status and Trends Program".
1305 East West Highway, N/SCI-1
In 1986, the National Mussel Watch Project was initiated and sampled 158 sites, 145 of which supplied mollusks. The Mussel Watch Project has now increased its monitoring effort to 250 sites. On the Gulf coast, Mussel Watch Project samples were collected and analyzed by the Texas A&M University's Geochemical and Environmental Research Group (GERG) from 1986 to 1999. Battelle was responsible for the U.S. East and West coasts field collections and analyses from 1986 to 1994. From 1995 to 1999 East and West coast samples were collected by GERG and NOAA. Since 2000 all analytical work has been performed by TDI-Brooks. Great Lakes sampling has been performed by NOAA since sampling began in 1992. Criteria for the selection and sampling of National Status and Trends Mussel Watch sites are provided below: - The NS&T Mussel Watch Project is not intended to quantify contaminants in "hot spots;" rather, mollusk collection sites were selected to be representative of their surroundings. Therefore, Mussel Watch sites were not located in areas such as New Bedford Harbor, where PCB concentrations are known to be uniquely high, or near waste discharge points or poorly flushed industrialized waterways. - Sampling substrates, where possible, are limited to natural substrates or structures containing them, such as rock (including rip-rap and jetties), sand, or mud. - Indigenous populations of mollusks must exist because caged mussels are not used in the regular monitoring effort. This criterion and constraint is one of the most important because mollusks are not uniformly distributed in the marine environment. - The NS&T Mussel Watch Project selected sites that were sampled by the earlier Environmental Protection Agency Mussel Watch monitoring program (Palmieri et al., 1984). Selecting sites that are coincident to the two monitoring efforts allows decadal comparisons between estuarine contaminants (Lauenstein et al., 1990). Some locations that formerly supported bivalve mollusks and were sampled by the Environmental Protection Agency no longer support bivalve populations. - Mussel Watch Project sites are collected in late fall and winter. Once a site and field sampling methods were established, repeat sampling was to occur within ±3 weeks of that sampling date. The rationale for winter sampling was to avoid collecting spawning organisms. When mollusks are collected at the same time of year, their spawning status is more likely to be the same as that of the previous year, improving the chances of discovering temporal trends. The number of species sampled is kept to a minimum in order to facilitate the greatest number of spatial data comparisons. The species collected include the blue mussel (Mytilus edulis) from Maine to Delaware Bay. Mytilus edulis alternates with the California mussel (Mytilus californianus) for West Coast collections. From Delaware Bay south and throughout the Gulf of Mexico, the American oyster (Crassostrea virginica) was sampled. Areas distant from the conterminous United States and those specimens collected in fresh water require the collection of alternate species. Ostrea sandvicensis is taken at Hawaiian Islands sites. The species collected from Puerto Rico is the Mangrove oyster (Crassostrea rhizophorae), at a site in southern Florida, the smooth edged jewel box (Chama sinuosa) is collected, and on the Great Lakes the introduced zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha and D. bugensis) are collected. Sites in Puerto Rico and in the Great Lakes were added in 1992. Three sites were established in Puerto Rico and seven sites were established in the Great Lakes region (Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron, Lake St. Clair, and Lake Erie). Though the predominant mussel species collected for this project has been identified as M. edulis, there is some uncertainty whether mussels found on the U.S. West coast are the separate species Mytilus trossulus and Mytilus galloprovincialis, or whether all three taxonomic groups are simply hybrids of each other. The question of whether these groups are separate species or are a species complex is discussed in detail in Seed, 1992. The National Status and Trends Program (NOAA, 1989) performed analyses of co-occurring species. M. edulis and C. virginica on the East Coast, and Mytilus edulis and Mytilus californianus on the West Coast, were compared for trace element and organic contaminant concentrations. While differences were found between the abilities of C. virginica and M. edulis to concentrate certain trace elements, there was no clear difference between the bioaccumulation abilities of the two mussel species (NOAA, 1989).
Field sample processing is minimal while laboratory sample processing is extensive. The same kind of field/site data has been supplied since the start of the Mussel Watch Project, in 1986.
The Mussel Watch Project Sites Dataset does not include data relating to the chemistry, quality assurance, or pathology data that is associated with each site.
Early sites information resulting from Loran-C was converted from time delay information to latitudes and longitudes. These earlier data may be suspect when sites were located close to large structures that could have interfered with accurate time delays. These concerns apply specifically to the first National Status and Trends sites document, for the East and West Coast Mussel Watch sites, NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 70, National Status and Trends Program: Monitoring Site Descriptions (1984-1990) for the National Mussel Watch and Benthic Surveillance Projects. The accuracy of the electronics used to determine site coordinates was confirmed by plotting sites on NOAA charts. During the early years of the project, when Loran-C was used, site locations were confirmed by using triangulation to prominent landmarks and then comparing the electronic and triangulation information to NOAA charts. The same kind of field/site data has been supplied since the start of the Mussel Watch Project, in 1986. Original site coordinates were derived from Loran-C time conversions. Coordinates for sites located on headlands and other promontories were also taken from NOAA charts. When GPS was first available the signal was intentionally degraded so earlier coordinate information, even if it resulted from GPS, is not a accurate as the data available in this nominal sites file.
In 1986, the National Mussel Watch Project was initiated and sampled 158 sites, 145 of which supplied mollusks. The Mussel Watch Project has now increased its monitoring effort to 250 sites. On the Gulf coast, Mussel Watch Project samples were collected and analyzed by the Texas A&M University's Geochemical and Environmental Research Group (GERG) from 1986 to 1999. Battelle was responsible for the U.S. East and West coasts field collections and analyses from 1986 to 1994. From 1995 to 1999 East and West coast samples were collected by GERG and NOAA. Since 2000 all analytical work has been performed by TDI-Brooks. Great Lakes sampling has been performed by NOAA since sampling began in 1992. Criteria for the selection and sampling of National Status and Trends Mussel Watch sites are provided below: - The NS&T Mussel Watch Project is not intended to quantify contaminants in "hot spots;" rather, mollusk collection sites were selected to be representative of their surroundings. Therefore, Mussel Watch sites were not located in areas such as New Bedford Harbor, where PCB concentrations are known to be uniquely high, or near waste discharge points or poorly flushed industrialized waterways. - Sampling substrates, where possible, are limited to natural substrates or structures containing them, such as rock (including rip-rap and jetties), sand, or mud. - Indigenous populations of mollusks must exist because caged mussels are not used in the regular monitoring effort. This criterion and constraint is one of the most important because mollusks are not uniformly distributed in the marine environment. - The NS&T Mussel Watch Project selected sites that were sampled by the earlier Environmental Protection Agency Mussel Watch monitoring program (Palmieri et al., 1984). Selecting sites that are coincident to the two monitoring efforts allows decadal comparisons between estuarine contaminants (Lauenstein et al., 1990). Some locations that formerly supported bivalve mollusks and were sampled by the Environmental Protection Agency no longer support bivalve populations. - Mussel Watch Project sites are collected in late fall and winter. Once a site and field sampling methods were established, repeat sampling was to occur within ±3 weeks of that sampling date. The rationale for winter sampling was to avoid collecting spawning organisms. When mollusks are collected at the same time of year, their spawning status is more likely to be the same as that of the previous year, improving the chances of discovering temporal trends. The number of species sampled is kept to a minimum in order to facilitate the greatest number of spatial data comparisons. The species collected include the blue mussel (Mytilus edulis) from Maine to Delaware Bay. Mytilus edulis alternates with the California mussel (Mytilus californianus) for West Coast collections. From Delaware Bay south and throughout the Gulf of Mexico, the American oyster (Crassostrea virginica) was sampled. Areas distant from the conterminous United States and those specimens collected in fresh water require the collection of alternate species. Ostrea sandvicensis is taken at Hawaiian Islands sites. The species collected from Puerto Rico is the Mangrove oyster (Crassostrea rhizophorae), at a site in southern Florida, the smooth edged jewel box (Chama sinuosa) is collected, and on the Great Lakes the introduced zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha and D. bugensis) are collected. Sites in Puerto Rico and in the Great Lakes were added in 1992. Three sites were established in Puerto Rico and seven sites were established in the Great Lakes region (Saginaw Bay, Lake Huron, Lake St. Clair, and Lake Erie). Though the predominant mussel species collected for this project has been identified as M. edulis, there is some uncertainty whether mussels found on the U.S. West coast are the separate species Mytilus trossulus and Mytilus galloprovincialis, or whether all three taxonomic groups are simply hybrids of each other. The question of whether these groups are separate species or are a species complex is discussed in detail in Seed, 1992. The National Status and Trends Program (NOAA, 1989) performed analyses of co-occurring species. M. edulis and C. virginica on the East Coast, and Mytilus edulis and Mytilus californianus on the West Coast, were compared for trace element and organic contaminant concentrations. While differences were found between the abilities of C. virginica and M. edulis to concentrate certain trace elements, there was no clear difference between the bioaccumulation abilities of the two mussel species (NOAA, 1989). Coordinates in the data file were determined with the use of non-differential GPS. Site observation information was supplied by a contractor and NOAA field teams (early Mussel site coordinates were determined with the Loran-C, see below)
Metadata imported.
Dataset moved.
Region Code: Region code is a 1 or 2 character code, which defines the geographic region.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Feature geometry.
ESRI
Estuarine Drainage (Sub. code): NOAA's Coastal Assessment Framework 5-digit Watershed Code.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
NS&T Site Code: A 4 character code, which defines the NS&T sampling site name. The code is generally chosen from the site's general and specific location.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Sequence Number: A sequential number assigned to a NS&T site and used for convenience to identify relative geographic location. The numbering begins in the northeast (Maine) and follows the coastline southward, then westward through the Gulf coast, northward along the Pacific coast and ends with the Great Lakes.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Estuarine Drainage (Maj. code): NOAA's Coastal Assessment Framework 4-digit Major Watershed Code.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Specific Location: A more precise location name where a sample was collected (e.g. "Dandy Point" in Chesapeake Bay).
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
State Abbreviation: An abbreviation for the US State or Territory where a NS&T sampling location resides.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Latitude (decimal degrees): Latitude in decimal degrees usually expressed to 5 decimal places.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Longitude (decimal degrees): Longitude in decimal degrees usually expressed to 5 decimal places.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Primary species code: Primary species common name code.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Secondary species code: Secondary species common name code.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Other site code.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Program Code: The 2-letter NS&T Program Project identification code. (e.g. MW = NS&T Mussel Watch Project).
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Target Date (ddmm): The target collection date for the site.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Nautical Chart: NOAA nautical chart number(s).
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Water Depth (m): Water depth in meters to tenths.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Bivalve collection method.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Sediment collection method code.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Contaminant Sources: Local sources of possible contamination.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Site access: Instructions in how to access the sampling site.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Geo Region: Geographic region. Examples include: Gulf coast, West coast, Great Lakes, North, Middle and South, Alaska, etc.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Estuarine Drainage (Sub. name): NOAA's Coastal Assessment Framework Watershed Name
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Estuarine Drainage (Maj. name): NOAA's Coastal Assessment Framework Major Watershed Name.
NS&T, Mussel Watch Project
Internal feature number.
ESRI
Additional Mussel Watch Project documentation can be found in these references.
Lauenstein, G. G., A. Y. Cantillo, S. Kokkinakis, J. Jobling, and R. Fay (1997) Mussel Watch Project Site Descriptions, through 1997. NOAAâ??s Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 112, Silver Spring, MD. Lauenstein, G. G. and A. Y. Cantillo (1993) Sampling and analytical methods of the National Status and Trends Program National Benthic Surveillance and Mussel Watch Projects 1984-1992: Overview and summary of methods, Volume I NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 71, Silver Spring, MD. Lauenstein, G. G., M. R. Harmon, and B. Gottholm (1993) National Status and Trends Program for Marine Environmental Quality: Benthic Surveillance and Mussel Watch Projects monitoring sites. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS ORCA 70, Silver Spring, MD. 353 pp.
1305 East West Highway, N/SCI-1
These data were prepared by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, make any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference therein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. Any views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Although all data have been used by NOAA, no warranty, expressed or implied, is made by NOAA as to the accuracy of the data and/or related materials. The act of distribution shall not constitute any such warranty, and no responsibility is assumed by NOAA in the use of these data or related materials.
1305 East West Highway, N/SCI-1