poster Miller progress

Progress toward a Comprehensive Map of the Seafloor ? Stephen P. Miller Head, Geological Data Center Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD La Jolla, California 92093-0220 USA spmiller@ucsd.edu: 

Progress toward a Comprehensive Map of the Seafloor ? Stephen P. Miller Head, Geological Data Center Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UCSD La Jolla, California 92093-0220 USA spmiller@ucsd.edu Greater success than Cook in Hawaii, but major gaps still exist between swaths Substantial progress in mapping at a regional scale by many institutions. These examples courtesy Barry Eakins, SIO Acoustic seafloor mapping takes time Consider just the Pacific Ocean, for example Even though SIO surveys an area twice the size of Italy each year, 259 years with 2 vessels needed for just deep part of Pacific (155.5 M km-sq). Cost is US$3.9 billion ($25K/day) Very unlikely to mobilize 20 multibeam vessels from worldwide institutions, so goal is more than a generation away Shallow water would take much longer, 50 vs. 3350 km-sq per day Speed of sound, speed of vessels dramatically slower than satellites There have been advances Wider swaths and better sonar resolution 191 beam points across swath, instead of 16 Regional grids from multiple sources of mapping data (see examples) Public domain software http://www.mbari.org/data/mbsystem/index.html But there are alarming trends … Despite best intentions and technology, in last 8 years new seafloor mapping data acquired at substantially less than full capacity Causes for concern Decreased capacity caused by: Reduced funding for ship time Vessels tied up in port, 2006 12-14 funded seagoing proposals revoked in 2005 3 year wait to schedule an expedition Ship funding lags behind Ocean Science funding During 1985-1995, UNOLS funding increased 39%, NSF Ocean Sciences 56% Increased costs 1999-2005 UNOLS day costs rose from $15K to $22K Rising fuel costs are a major problem Clearance not negotiated Multibeam not recorded within 200 nm of coast Not all data not released to public Classified or academic proprietary hold Recent NSF mandate requires release within 2 years, but some scientists hold data prior to ruling. Policies and enforcement varies with other agencies Data from some nations released only rarely Continuing demand for site surveys to support Ocean Drilling Ship time unavailable Academic fleet is aging Agencies reluctant to commit to vessel replacement Changing practices Trend is toward specific site investigations, and repeat visits Not systematic mapping or exploring Slow speeds for detailed studies Area mapping rate less than 10% of cruise survey rate Future will place even greater demands on ship time to support ocean observatories Repeat transits to sites, not broad reconnaissance Implications for altimetry Total ship costs higher than a mission Acoustic mapping not completed until we’re all retired or worse Troubling scenario for young researchers, as they consider embarking on a career in the marine sciences While satellite altimetry will never replace detailed acoustic mapping, a higher resolution mission will support: Expedition planning IODP site surveys Identification of tectonic patterns Modeling of regional phenomena Tsunamis and ocean mixing Unfortunately now, more than ever, there is a need for a high resolution altimetry mission What can we do? Advocate increased funding for ocean exploration Agencies request help in getting the word out Media Legislators Teachers and students Encourage policy for clearance to map in EEZ Encourage international scientists to release data At least contribute to gridded representation Systematic planning of transits Adjacent swaths Avoid duplication Systematic global integration Regional grids, swath data, predicted topography Online SIO multibeam data from 300 expeditions WHOI collection work-in-progress http://SIOExplorer.ucsd.edu Gulf of California 1939 Expedition, Roger Revelle 2006 not a good year -- Area of Italy R/V Thomas Washington 16 beams R/V Melville 121 beams R/V Revelle 14, 191 beams