Coastal Circulation and Water-Column 

Properties off Kalaupapa National Historical 

Park, Molokai, Hawaii, 2008–2010

By Curt D. Storlazzi, M. Katherine Presto, and Eric K. Brown 

Aerial photograph of the Kalaupapa Peninsula on the north coast of Molokai, Hawaii, in 2006.

Open-File Report 2011-1154

U.S. Department of the Interior 

U.S. Geological Survey 
ii

U.S. Department of the Interior

KEN SALAZAR, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Marcia K. McNutt, Director 

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2011 

For product and ordering information:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth,

its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Suggested citation:

Storlazzi, C.D., Presto, M.K., and Brown, E.K., 2011, Coastal Circulation and Water 

Column Properties off Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Molokai, Hawaii, 2008–

2010: USGS Open-File Report 2011-1154, 33 p. [http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1154/].

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not 

imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the 

individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within 

this report.
iii

Contents 

Abstract ............................................................................................................................ 1 

Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 

Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................... 1 

Objectives ................................................................................................................... 2 

Methods ........................................................................................................................... 2 

Instrumentation ................................................................................................................ 2 

Data Quality ..................................................................................................................... 3 

Results and Discussion .................................................................................................... 4 

Tides ........................................................................................................................... 5 

Waves ........................................................................................................................ 5 

Currents ...................................................................................................................... 5 

Temperature ............................................................................................................... 7 

Salinity ......................................................................................................................10

Turbidity .................................................................................................................... 10 

Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 13 

Recommendations ......................................................................................................... 13 

Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................... 14 

References .................................................................................................................... 14 

Additional Digital Information ......................................................................................... 15 

Direct Contact Information ............................................................................................. 15 

Figures 

1. Aerial photograph of the study area ............................................................................. 3 

2. Underwater photograph of NPS instrument package ................................................... 4 

3. Time-series plot of tidal height ..................................................................................... 5 

4. Map showing the mean significant wave heights and directions for the different 

seasons ...................................................................................................................... 6 

5. Map showing the mean current speeds and directions for the different seasons ......... 7 

6. Map showing the relative magnitude and direction of currents during different 

forcing conditions ........................................................................................................ 8 

7. Time-series plots showing the relationships between tides, currents, water 

temperature, and salinity ............................................................................................ 9 

8. Scatter plot showing the relationship between water temperature and salinity ..........10

9. Time-series plots showing the relationship between wave height and turbidity 

during early December 2008 .................................................................................... 11 

10. Time-series plots showing the relationship between wave height and turbidity 

during early December 2009 .................................................................................... 12 
iv

Tables 

1. Wave Statistics .......................................................................................................... 16 

2. Current Statistics ........................................................................................................ 16 

3. Temperature Statistics ............................................................................................... 17 

4. Salinity Statistics ........................................................................................................ 17

5. Turbidity Statistics ...................................................................................................... 17 

Appendixes 

1. Time-series plots of variations in water level and wave heights, periods, and 

directions through time ............................................................................................. 18 

2. Time-series plots of variations in water level, currents, and temperature through 

time. .......................................................................................................................... 22 

3. Time-series plots of variations in water temperature and salinity through time. ......... 26 

4. Time-series plots of variations in turbidity through time .............................................29

5. Suggested RDI 1200 kHz ADCP deployment parameters ......................................... 31 

6. Suggested SeaBird Micorcat SBE-37SMP ADCP deployment parameters ............... 32 

7. Suggested Aquatec/Seapoint 210-TY OBS deployment parameters ......................... 33 
Coastal Circulation and Water Column Properties off 

Kalaupapa National Historical Park, Molokai, Hawaii, 

2008–2010 

By Curt D. Storlazzi1, M. Katherine Presto1, and Eric K. Brown2 

1

U.S. Geological Survey, Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center, 400 Natural Bridges Drive, Santa 

Cruz, CA 95060 

2

National Park Service, Kalaupapa National Historical Park, PO Box 96718, Hawaii National Park, HI 

96718 

Abstract 

More than 2.2 million measurements of oceanographic forcing and the resulting watercolumn properties were made off U.S. National Park Service’s Kalaupapa National Historical 

Park on the north shore of Molokai, Hawaii, between 2008 and 2010 to understand the role of 

oceanographic processes on the health and sustainability of the area’s marine resources. The 

tides off the Kalaupapa Peninsula are mixed semidiurnal. The wave climate is dominated by two 

end-members: large northwest Pacific winter swell that directly impacts the study site, and 

smaller, shorter-period northeast trade-wind waves that have to refract around the peninsula, 

resulting in a more northerly direction before propagating over the study site. The currents 

primarily are alongshore and are faster at the surface than close to the seabed; large wave events, 

however, tend to drive flow in a more cross-shore orientation. The tidal currents flood to the 

north and ebb to the south. The waters off the peninsula appear to be a mix of cooler, more 

saline, deeper oceanic waters and shallow, warmer, lower-salinity nearshore waters, with 

intermittent injections of freshwater, generally during the winters. Overall, the turbidity levels 

were low, except during large wave events. The low overall turbidity levels and rapid return to 

pre-event background levels following the cessation of forcing suggest that there is little finegrained material. Large wave events likely inhibit the settlement of fine-grained sediment at the 

site. A number of phenomena were observed that indicate the complexity of coastal circulation 

and water-column properties in the area and may help scientists and resource managers to better 

understand the implications of the processes on marine ecosystem health. 

Introduction 

Statement of the Problem 

Oceanographic forces (tides, waves, and currents) and water-column properties 

(temperature, salinity, and turbidity) influence coastal and marine natural resources in all U.S. 

National Park Service (NPS) Pacific Island National Parks and also impact culturally significant 

resources for parks in the NPS Pacific Islands Network (PACN) that have marine boundaries. An 

understanding of oceanographic characteristics in nearshore park waters is critical to 

understanding ecosystem processes, such as larval transport, wave dynamics, and sedimentation 

that structure coral-reef ecosystems within park boundaries. This becomes especially relevant in 
2

the face of global climate change, as some parameters (for example, temperature) will be highly 

influential in shaping the marine resources within the park. Consequently, marine resource 

managers need baseline information on the spatial and temporal variability of these parameters. 

In particular, it is important to document the rate of change of such parameters, as these will 

dictate the timeliness of the management response. 

Oceanographic data have been collected in Kalaupapa National Historical Park (KALA) 

in PACN since the summer of 2008, and these data represent a broad spectrum of environmental 

conditions that are likely to influence the coastal and marine resources. KALA staff, however, 

currently lack the necessary tools and expertise to analyze these data. The timely interpretation 

of these data is integral in the general management plan (GMP) that KALA currently is 

undertaking. Such analyses serve not only as a baseline to predict and measure the outcome of 

future conditions along the coastline, but also will be used to educate the public about factors 

influencing the coastal and marine natural and cultural resources during the GMP process. 

Objective 

The objective of this project was for U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Pacific Coastal and 

Marine Science Center’s (PCMSC) Coral Reef Project personnel to process, analyze, and 

provide interpretation of physical oceanographic data collected by NPS-KALA staff between the 

summer of 2008 and early spring of 2010. In addition, USGS-PCMSC personnel were to provide 

recommendations for instrument setup for future deployments. 

Methods 

USGS-PCMSC personnel have developed numerical analytical tools to process these 

types of oceanographic data (for example, Xu and others, 2002). Drawing on a decade of 

experience with the same oceanographic instruments, USGS-PCMSC Coral Reef Project staff 

have described the oceanographic characteristics of nearshore waters around the state of Hawaii 

and have published their results in peer-reviewed journals (for example, Storlazzi and Jaffe, 

2008; Storlazzi, Ogston, and others, 2004; Storlazzi, McManus, and others, 2006; Storlazzi, 

Field, and others, 2009) and USGS peer-reviewed reports for NPS (Storlazzi and Presto, 2005; 

Storlazzi, Russell, and others, 2005; Storlazzi, Presto, and others, 2009). USGS-PCMSC 

personnel were to provide NPS-KALA staff with analysis and interpretation of the 

oceanographic data along the lines of previously published results, providing insight into 

variations in flow and water-column parameters owing to large wave events, tidal forcing, and 

seasonality of such forcing and water-column response. Furthermore, USGS-PCMSC Coral Reef 

Project staff also provided guidelines for future deployments of the different oceanographic 

sensors. 

Instrumentation 

NPS-KALA deployed three oceanographic instruments during each measurement period 

at 21.18962° N, 156.98666° W, approximately 300 m offshore of the town of Kalaupapa at a 

depth of 17 m (fig. 1), on the north coast of Molokai, Hawaii. These instruments included (1) an 

RD Instruments 1200 kHz Workhorse Monitor acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP) with 
3

Figure 1. Aerial photograph of the Kalaupapa Peninsula on the north coast of Molokai, Hawaii, showing the location 

of the National Park Service oceanographic instrument package. 

pressure sensor; (2) a SeaBird Microcat SBE-37SMP conductivity and temperature (CT) sensor; 

and (3) an Aquatec 210-TY logger with Seapoint 880- m optical backscatter sensor (OBS), as 

shown in figure 2. The ADCP provided information on tides, waves, currents, and acoustic 

backscatter. The CT sensor obtained information on water temperature and conductivity, from 

which salinity was computed, and the OBS provided information on turbidity. 

Data Quality 

 There were a few consistent issues with the ADCP data. The ADCP, a 1200 kHz unit, 

was deployed at a depth of approximately 17 m. The ADCP was set-up to measure current and 

acoustic-backscatter profiles in 49 0.5-m bins with approximately 50 pings per ensemble every 5 

min and a 2400-sample wave burst at 2 Hz every hour. The excessive number of profile bins and 

low number of samples per burst resulted in two issues: (1) problems with the wave calculations; 

and (2) lower than possible resolution of currents. Owing to the large number of bins, the wave 

calculations were automatically pushed above the ocean surface because the RD Instruments 
4

Figure 2. Underwater photograph of instrument package deployed at a depth of 17 m off the Kalaupapa Peninsula. 

routines search for bins with good data to use to calculate the wave parameters within a set 

number of bins from the last bin. The engineers at RD Instruments diagnosed this problem and 

re-ran the raw data through their WAVES processing software by using valid bins below the 

ocean surface and thus were able to extract valid wave data. This deployment set-up, using a 

large number (49) of small (0.5 m) bins in relatively deep (17 m) water for the frequency of the 

instrument (1200 kHz) resulted in low (<1 cm/s) resolution of the current velocity and thus the 

resulting speeds and directions. This put the instrument’s resolution on order of the average 

current speeds (1-9 cm/s). 

 Another problem encountered with the ADCP was the collection of sediment under the 

pressure sensor’s protective cover during the course of multiple deployments, which was not 

removed during refurbishment before redeployment. This caused errors in the measurements of 

water depth and resulting wave calculations. Lastly, during one deployment the ADCP was 

aligned on its mount such that one of the beams was blocked by part of the instrument package, 

rendering the data from the one beam useless. The RD Instruments engineers rectified this issue 

by removing the blocked beam’s data from the processing routines. The quality of the OBS data

was reduced owing to biofouling of the instrument’s optics, which commonly happens in warm, 

clear tropical waters. This issue has hampered numerous USGS-PCMSC studies in the past and 

resulted in only 5-10 days of high-quality turbidity data for this study before growth on the optics 

degraded the data. The CT data were of high quality throughout all of the deployments. 

Results and Discussion 

NPS-KALA staff provided USGS-PCMSC Coral Reef Project personnel with 12 data 

sets from the three different oceanographic instruments that covered four time periods – two 
5

summers and two winters. The four time periods were July-October 2008 (2008 Year Days 198-

273), December 2008-February 2009 (2008 Year Days 346-415), August-October 2009 (2009 

Year Days 225-282), and December 2009-February 2010 (2009 Year Days 350-419).

Tides 

The tides off KALA are mixed, semidiurnal with two uneven high tides and two uneven 

low tides per day; thus the tides change just over every 6 hours (fig. 3). The mean daily tidal 

range is roughly 0.6 m, while the minimum and maximum daily tidal ranges are 0.4 m and 0.9 m, 

respectively. 

Figure 3. Time-series plot of tidal height, in meters, during the 2008 winter showing the semidiurnal nature of the 

tides. This time period encompassed five spring-neap tidal cycles. 

Waves 

The significant wave heights measured off KALA were, on average, almost three times 

larger and more variable during the two winters than during the two summers (0.38±0.15 m and 

1.00±0.47 m, respectively; table 1); they ranged from 0.12-1.41 m during the two summers to 

0.25-3.46 m during the two winters (fig. 4; table 1; appendix 1). The dominant wave periods 

were, on average, almost 3 s longer during the two winters than during the two summers, with 

little difference in the variability (6.8±2.0 s and 9.7±2.0 s, respectively; table 1); they ranged 

from 3.1-13.6 s during the two summers to 4.5-16.9 s during the two winters. The mean wave 

directions during the two summers were slightly more northerly (301±34°) than during the two 

winters (290±39°). Together, these data show the influence of the two main sources of waves 

along KALA: (1) larger, longer-period north Pacific winter swell out of the northwest; and (2) 

shorter, smaller northeast trade-wind waves that refract around the Kalaupapa Peninsula and 

approach the instrument site from a more northerly direction than the less-refracted north Pacific 

swell. 

Currents

The mean current speeds ± one standard deviation during the two summers were 

0.00±0.02 m/s close to the surface and 0.00±0.01 m/s close to the seabed and 0.02±0.05 m/s 

close to the surface and 0.03±0.03 m/s close to the seabed during the two winters (fig. 5; table 2; 

appendix 2). The mean current directions ± one standard deviation during the two summers were 

35±111° close to the surface and 63±99° close to the seabed; during the two winters they were 

62±102° close to the surface and 67±99° to the seabed. These differences in current speeds and 
6

Figure 4. Maps showing the mean (thick vectors) and variability (thin ellipses) in wave heights and directions, in 

meters from true north, for the different seasons. A, 2008 summer. B, 2008-2009 winter. C, 2009 summer. D, 2009-

2010 winter. A 2-m vector length is shown for scale. 

directions with depth cause velocity shear, and they result in differing directions of material (for 

example, larvae, sediment, nutrients, and contaminants) flux at different heights above the 

seabed. Flow primarily was alongshore close to the surface and more cross-shore near the 

seabed, possibly owing to wave-driven flows. Tidal currents flooded to the north and ebbed to 

the south, with the near-surface tidal currents faster than those close to the seabed (fig. 6a-b). 

During large wave events, the near-surface flow primarily was downcoast to the southwest, 

likely driven by wave-breaking along the shoreline to the north of the instrument package (fig. 

6c). Close to the seabed, the currents primarily were onshore during large wave events (fig. 6d), 
7

Figure 5. Maps showing the mean (thick vectors) and variability (thin ellipses) in current speeds and directions, in 

meters from true north, for the different seasons. A, 2008 summer. B, 2008-2009 winter. C, 2009 summer. D, 2009-

2010 winter. Red denotes near-surface currents; blue denotes near-bed currents. A 0.05-m/s vector length is shown 

for scale. 

possibly owing to wave shoaling over the hydraulically rough boulders and corals in the area 

(fig. 2). 

Temperature 

Water temperatures off the peninsula ranged from 22.25 to 26.54°C, with a mean 

temperature ± one standard deviation of 25.54±0.35°C during the two summers and 

23.76±0.53°C during the two winters (table 3; appendix 3). Water temperatures generally rose 
8

Figure 6. Maps showing the relative magnitude and direction of currents during different forcing conditions. A, Nearsurface tidal currents, in meters per second from true north. Magenta is flood tide and orange is ebb tide. B, Near-bed 

tidal currents, in meters per second from true north. Magenta is flood tide and orange is ebb tide. C, Near-surface 

currents during a large wave event (January 2009), in meters per second from true north. D, Near-bed currents 

during a large wave event (January 2009), in meters per second from true north. A 0.10-m/s vector length is shown 

for scale. 

0.2°C during the day, owing to insolation, and cooled during the night (fig. 7). The seasonal 

trend shows fairly constant temperatures throughout the summer, with slight warming towards 

the end of the deployments (appendix 3.1, 3.3). The decreasing temperature trend during the 

winters shows less warming because of insolation, and the larger variations may be the result of 

increased water column mixing from the large wave events during this season (appendix 3.2, 
9

Figure 7. Time-series plots showing the relationships between tides, currents, water temperature, and salinity. A, 

Tidal height, in meters. B, Cross-shore current velocities, in meters per second. C, Alongshore current velocities, in 

meters per second. D, Water temperature, in degrees Celsius. E, Salinity, in Practical Salinity Units (PSU). 
10

3.4). Water temperature generally decreased during ebb tides because cooler water close to shore 

was advected to the south by the falling tide (fig. 7). 

Salinity 

Salinity measurements off the peninsula ranged from 34.94 to 35.35 PSU, with a mean 

salinity ± one standard deviation of 35.16±0.07 PSU during the two summers and 35.12±0.05 

PSU during the two winters (table 4; appendix 3). Salinity generally rose during flood tides 

because more saline offshore water was advected onshore and to the north by the rising tide (fig. 

7). The greatest variability in temperature and salinity occurs during higher low tide. There 

seems to be a depletion of nearshore waters by the time the lower low tide occurs. In addition, 

the shallow water of the lower low tide allows for higher insolation and greater influence from 

higher salinity water offshore. The seasonal trend in salinity during the summer deployments 

shows fairly constant salinity with little overall variation (<0.3 PSU; appendix 3.1). The small 

perturbations in the salinity signal may be the result of internal waves, as discussed further 

below. The seasonal trend during winter deployments also shows fairly constant salinity with 

decreases (~0.2 to 0.5 PSU) during rainfall/storm events (appendix 3.2 and 3.4) 

 The co-variation of temp and salinity show the two main controls on variations in salinity 

at the study site (fig. 8). The trend between low temperature–high salinity and high temperature–

low salinity shows the mixing of what appears to be cooler, more saline, deeper oceanic waters 

and shallow, warmer, lower-salinity nearshore waters. The large variation in salinity at a constant 

temperature of approximately 24.8°C appears to be the result of an influx of freshwater, either 

from adjacent streams or submarine groundwater discharge, close to the site around 2008 Year 

Day 350 (appendix 3.2). 

 The high-frequency (order of 10s of min) concurrent variations in both temperature and 

salinity, which can be seen throughout the two summer periods and between large wave events 

during the two winters (appendix 3), appear to be caused by the propagation of high-frequency 

internal waves past the instrument site. Similar motions have been observed along shallow reefs 

elsewhere in Hawaii (Storlazzi and Presto, 2005; Storlazzi and Jaffe, 2008) and the western 

Pacific (Storlazzi, Presto, and others, 2009) and may be important for coral reef ecosystem 

health. 

Figure 8. Scatter plot showing the relationship between water temperature, in degrees Celsius, and salinity, in 

Practical Salinity Units (PSU). 

Turbidity 

High-resolution turbidity data free from the effects of biofouling were only available 

from approximately the first 5-10 days of each deployment (appendix 4). During the short time 
11

period when the OBS’s optics were clear, the turbidity in the study area ranged from 0.13 to 

116.48 NTU, with a mean turbidity ± one standard deviation of 0.33±0.12 NTU (table 5) during 

the summer deployments and a mean turbidity ± one standard deviation of 0.95±3.03 NTU 

during the winter deployments (table 5). 

 Although the turbidity records were limited in length, the influence of large waves on 

turbidity was evident in the 2008-2009 winter dataset (fig. 9). When the wave height exceeded 

approximately 0.8 m at the study site, turbidity was above baseline levels (<1 NTU), with 

instantaneous turbidity levels exceeding 5 NTUs. The turbidity levels returned to background 

levels within hours when the wave height dropped below 0.8 m. The low overall turbidity levels 

during this large wave event, in conjunction with the rapid return to pre-event background levels 

following the cessation of forcing, suggest either that currents rapidly advected the material away 

from the study site, or more likely, that fine-grained material is absent at the site owing to the 

exposure to large wave events that inhibit the settlement of fine-grained sediment. 

Figure 9. Time-series plots showing the relationship between wave height and turbidity during early December 2008.

A, Wave height, in meters. B, Turbidity, in National Turbidity Units (NTU). 

 Another wave event during the winter of 2009-2010 also demonstrated the lack of 

available fine-grained sediment at the study site (fig. 10). The large increases in turbidity 
12

occurred once the wave heights reached 1.5 m, and only during sustained large wave heights (>2 

m) did the elevation in turbidity increase to more than 10 NTU. During this time the turbidity 

values were highly variable, indicating that the sediment probably was sand-sized or coarser with 

high settling velocities that required greater sheer stresses (wave-orbital velocities) to keep the 

sediment in suspension. The quick return (order of hours) to pre-event turbidity levels also 

suggests that the sediment in suspension was coarser-grained material that settled rapidly 

following the cessation of forcing. 

Figure 10. Time-series plots showing the relationship between wave height and turbidity during early December 

2009. A, Wave height, in meters. B, Turbidity, in National Turbidity Units (NTU). 

 The State of Hawaii Department of Health’s Administrative Rules, Title 11, Chapter 54, 

Water Quality Standards for “open ocean out to 600 foot depth”, as defined on page 54-44 of that 

report (Department of Health, 2004), sets the maximum allowable “dry” and “wet” mean 

turbidity levels at 0.20 and 0.50 NTU, respectively. The mean turbidity values for the 4 periods 

of study exceeded the dry threshold, and the mean turbidity values during the 2008-2009 and 

2009-2010 winters exceeded the wet threshold (table 5). 
13

Conclusions 

More than 2.2 million measurements of oceanographic forcing and the resulting watercolumn properties were made off KALA between 2008 and 2010. Key findings from these 

measurements and analyses include the following: 

(1) The tides are mixed, semidiurnal, with a mean daily tidal range of 0.6 m and minimum and 

maximum daily tidal range of 0.4 m and 0.9 m, respectively. 

(2) The wave climate is dominated by two end-members: large northwest Pacific winter swell 

that directly impacts the study site, and smaller, shorter-period northeast trade-wind waves that 

have to refract around the peninsula resulting in a more northerly direction before propagating 

over the study site. 

(3) The currents primarily are alongshore and are faster at the surface then close to the seabed; 

large wave events, however, tend to drive flow in a more cross-shore orientation. The tidal 

currents flood to the north and ebb to the south. Velocity shear throughout the water column 

result in different directions of material (for example, larvae, sediment, nutrients, and 

contaminants) flux at different heights above the seabed. 

(4) The waters appear to be a mix of cooler, more saline, deeper oceanic waters and shallow, 

warmer, lower-salinity nearshore waters, with intermittent injections of freshwater, generally 

during the winters. During the summers, high-frequency internal waves appear to have 

propagated past the instrument site; these may be important for coral-reef ecosystem health by 

advecting deep, cool, more nutrient-rich waters up into the warm, oligotrophic surface waters. 

(5) Overall, the turbidity levels were low, except during large wave events. The low overall 

turbidity levels and rapid return to pre-event background levels following the cessation of 

forcing suggest that there is little fine-grained material at the site owing to winnowing by large 

wave events. 

These data provide information on the nature and controls on flow and water-column properties 

off the Kalaupapa Peninsula, Molokai. A number of phenomena were observed that indicate the 

complexity of coastal circulation and water-column properties in the area and may help scientists 

and resource managers to better understand the implications of the processes on coral-reef 

ecosystem health. 

Recommendations 

Per the NPS-USGS Interagency Agreement, we are providing a few recommendations for future 

NPS instrument deployments. 

(1) The RD Instruments ADCP should be set up differently based on the water depth and current 

speeds at the study site. Because of the high frequency (1200 kHz) of the instrument, the bin size 

should be increased to 1 m, and the number of pings per ensemble should be increased to 100 to 

provide better resolution of the current measurements. These changes will make the 

measurement error on the order of the observed current speeds. If continued deployments are 

desired, a better option would be to switch with one of the other NPS-PACN parks to deploy a 

RDI 600 kHz ADCP, which is better suited for deployment at a depth of 14 m. See appendix 5 

for suggested deployment parameters for the NPS RD Instruments ADCP. 
14

(2) There were no detectable issues with the SeaBird Microcat’s deployment scheme. As 

requested, we did provide suggested deployment parameters in appendix 6, which are similar to 

the existing ones used by NPS. 

(3) The Aquatec/Seapoint OBS should be set up differently to take advantage of the burstsampling mode of the instrument; this will increase the resolution of the resulting data. See 

appendix 7 for suggested deployment parameters for the NPS Aquatec/Seapoint OBS. The rapid 

biofouling of the instrument’s optics, however, needs to be addressed in order to provide longterm, high-quality measurements to determine how turbidity at KALA compares to State of 

Hawaii water-quality standards. The biofouling can be minimized by frequent cleaning of the 

instrument’s optics, which can be accomplished by two potential methods: scuba diver or 

mechanical wiper. Because the OBS’s optics off KALA frequently fouled within 5-10 days, 8-16 

scuba dives would be required to clean the optics by hand during a 3-month deployment; this 

would be difficult in the wintertime when large waves would likely make these operations 

dangerous. The other option, a mechanical wiper, comes at a high initial cost (~$1500), but most 

run on common alkaline AA batteries and can wipe twice per day for up 6 months. USGS 

PCMSC staff have dealt with similar issues and determined that for their studies, mechanical 

wipers, such as ZebraTech’s Hydro-Wipers (http://www.zebra-tech.co.nz/Hydro-Wiper), were 

the most cost-efficient long-term solution. 

Acknowledgments 

This effort was funded by the U.S. National Park Service’s Inventory and Monitoring 

Program under U.S. National Park Service-U.S. Geological Survey Interagency Agreement 

F9088100301 and was supported by the USGS’s Coral Reef Project as part of an effort in the 

United States and its trust territories to better understand the affect of geologic processes on coral 

reef systems. We would like to thank NPS-KALA staff who helped with the deployment, 

recovery, and refurbishment of the instrument package. We would also like to thank Nancy 

Prouty (USGS) and Kurt Rosenberger (USGS), who contributed numerous excellent suggestions 

and a timely review of our work. 

References 

Department of Health, Office of Environmental Quality Control, State of Hawaii, 2004, Hawaii 

administrative rules; amendment and compilation of Chapter 11-54, 64 p., accessed 

February, 15, 2010, at http://oeqc.doh.hawaii.gov/sites/har/AdmRules1/11-54.pdf.

Storlazzi, C.D. and Presto, M.K., 2005, Coastal circulation and water column properties along 

Kaloko-Honokohau National Historical Park, Hawaii; part I; measurements of waves, 

currents, temperature, salinity and turbidity, April-October 2004: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 2005-1161, 30 p. (also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1161/).

Storlazzi, C.D., and Jaffe, B.E., 2008, The relative contribution of processes driving variability in 

flow, shear, and turbidity over a fringing coral reef – West Maui, Hawaii: Estuarine 

Coastal and Shelf Science, v. 77, no. 4, p. 549-564. 

Storlazzi, C.D., Ogston, A.S., Bothner, M.H., Field, M.E., and Presto, M.K., 2004, Wave- and 

tidally driven flow and sediment flux across a fringing coral reef – south-central Molokai, 

Hawaii: Continental Shelf Research, v. 24, p. 1397-1419.

Storlazzi, C.D., Russell, M.A., Presto, M.K., and Burbank, J.E., 2005, Flow patterns and current 

structure at the USS Arizona Memorial – April, 2005: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 2005-1334, 24 p. (also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1334/.) 
15

Storlazzi, C.D., McManus, M.A., Logan, J.B., and McLaughlin, B.E., 2006, Cross-shore velocity 

shear, eddies, and heterogeneity in water-column properties over fringing coral reefs –

West Maui, Hawaii: Continental Shelf Research, p. 401-421.

Storlazzi, C.D., Field, M.E., Bothner, M.H., Presto M.K., and Draut, A.E., 2009, Controls on 

sediment dynamics in a coral reef embayment; Hanalei Bay, Kauai: Marine Geology, 

v. 264, p. 140-151.

Storlazzi, C.D., Presto, M.K., and Logan, J.B., 2009, Coastal circulation and sediment dynamics 

in War-in-the-Pacific National Historical Park, Guam; measurements of waves, currents, 

temperature, salinity, and turbidity; June 2007-January 2008: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 2009-1195, 79 p. (also available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1195/).

Xu, J., Lightsom, F., Noble, M., and Denham, C., 2002, CMGTool; software for processing, 

analyzing, and visualizing time-series oceanographic data: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 02-19, 27 p. (also available at http://geopubs.wr.usgs.gov/openfile/of02-19/ and http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/CMGTooL/CMGTooLmanual.pdf).

Additional Digital Information 

For an online PDF version of this report, please see: 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1154/

For more information on the U.S. Geological Survey’s Pacific Coastal and Marine Science 

Center, please see: 

http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/

For more information on the U.S. Geological Survey’s Pacific Coastal and Marine Science 

Center’s Coral Reef Project, please see: 

http://coralreefs.wr.usgs.gov/

Direct Contact Information 

Regarding this Report: 

Curt D. Storlazzi (USGS Coral Reef Project chief): cstorlazzi@usgs.gov
16

Table 1. Wave Statistics. 

Wave direction is ―From‖.

Time (Year Days) Parameter Mean ± 1 Std Deviation Minimum Maximum

Summer 2008 

(198-273) Height [m] 0.30±0.10 0.12 0.76

Period [s] 6.3±1.5 3.5 12.3

Direction [o] 297±40 0 356

Winter 2008-2009 

(346-415) Height [m] 0.82 ±0.48 0.25 2.92

Period [s] 8.9±2.0 3.7 15.5

Direction [o] 277±65 1 358

Summer 2009 

(225-282) Height [m] 0.47±0.20 0.17 1.41

Period [s] 7.3±2.4 2.7 14.8

Direction [o] 305±29 1 358

Winter 2009-2010 

(350-419) Height [m] 1.17±0.46 0.17 3.46

Period [s] 10.5±1.9 5.2 18.2

Direction [o] 302±13 7 359

Table 2. Current Statistics.

Current direction is ―Going to‖.

N.S. = Near-surface observation. 

N.B. = Near-seabed observation.

Time (Year Days) Parameter Depth

[m]

Mean ± 1 Std Deviation Minimum Maximum

Summer 2008

(198-273)

Speed [m/s] 2.0 (N.S.) 0.00±0.01 0.00 0.10

Direction [o] 2.0 (N.S.) 36±109 0 359

Speed [m/s] 15.5 (N.B.) 0.00±0.01 0.00 0.05

Direction [o] 15.5 (N.B.) 25±105 0 359

Winter 2008-2009

(346-415)

Speed [m/s] 2.0 (N.S.) 0.01±0.03 0.00 0.22

Direction [o] 2.0 (N.S.) 225±102 0 359

Speed [m/s] 15.5 (N.B.) 0.02±0.03 0.00 0.20

Direction [o] 15.5 (N.B.) 8±130 0 359

Summer 2009

(225-282)

Speed [m/s] 2.0 (N.S.) 0.00±0.02 0.00 0.10

Direction [o] 2.0 (N.S.) 35±114 0 359

Speed [m/s] 15.5 (N.B.) 0.01±0.02 0.00 0.15

Direction [o] 15.5 (N.B.) 102±92 0 359

Winter 2009-2010 (350-419) Speed [m/s] 2.0 (N.S.) 0.03±0.07 0.00 0.45

Direction [o] 2.0 (N.S.) 299±101 0 359

Speed [m/s] 15.5 (N.B.) 0.04±0.03 0.00 0.20

Direction [o] 15.5 (N.B.) 125±68 0 359
17

Table 3. Temperature Statistics.

Time (Year Days) Mean ± 1 Std Deviation

[

oC]

Minimum

[

oC]

Maximum

[

oC]

Summer 2008 

(198-273) 25.38±0.32 24.51 26.54

Winter 2008-2009 

(346-415) 23.80±0.56 22.25 25.01

Summer 2009 

(225-282) 25.71±0.38 24.32 26.50

Winter 2009-2010 

(350-419) 23.72±0.51 22.25 24.93

Table 4. Salinity Statistics.

Time (Year Days) Mean ± 1 Std Deviation

[PSU]

Minimum

[PSU]

Maximum

[PSU]

Summer 2008 

(198-273) 35.112±0.089 34.953 35.258

Winter 2008-2009 

(346-415) 35.113±0.059 34.427 35.203

Summer 2009 

(225-282) 35.20±0.07 35.08 35.35

Winter 2009-2010 

(350-415) 35.12±0.04 34.94 35.20

Table 5. Turbidity Statistics. 

Time (Year Days) Mean ± 1 Std Deviation

[NTU]

Minimum

[NTU]

Maximum

[NTU]

Summer 2008*

(198-205) 0.32±0.10 0.24 1.00

Winter 2008-2009*

(346-351) 0.55±0.51 0.19 8.66

Summer 2009*

(225-230) 0.33±0.14 0.13 1.24

Winter 2009-2010*

(350-363) 1.35±5.55 0.35 116.48

*Statistics are for short time periods owing to biofouling of the sensor’s optics.
18

Appendixes 

Appendix 1. Time series plots of variations in water level and wave heights, periods, 

and directions through time from the acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP). 

Appendix 1.1. Tide and wave data for the 2008 summer from the ADCP. A, Tidal height, in meters. B, Wave height, 

in meters, with significant wave height in blue and maximum wave height in red. C, Wave period, in seconds, with 

mean wave period in blue and peak wave period in red. D, Wave height, in meters, in red and wave height and 

direction, in meters from true north, in blue. 
19

Appendix 1.2. Tide and wave data for the 2008-2009 winter from the ADCP. A, Tidal height, in meters. B, Wave 

height, in meters, with significant wave height in blue and maximum wave height in red. C, Wave period, in seconds, 

with mean wave period in blue and peak wave period in red. D, Wave height, in meters, in red and wave height and 

direction, in meters from true north, in blue. 
20

Appendix 1.3. Tide and wave data for the 2009 summer from the ADCP. A, Tidal height, in meters. B, Wave height, 

in meters, with significant wave height in blue and maximum wave height in red. C, Wave period, in seconds, with 

mean wave period in blue and peak wave period in red. D, Wave height, in meters, in red and wave height and 

direction, in meters from true north, in blue. The odd pressure signal was likely caused by material (for example, 

sediment) stuck in the pressure sensor. 
21

Appendix 1.4. Tide and wave data for the 2009-2010 winter from the ADCP. A, Tidal height, in meters. B, Wave 

height, in meters, with significant wave height in blue and maximum wave height in red. C, Wave period, in seconds, 

with mean wave period in blue and peak wave period in red. D, Wave height, in meters, in red and wave height and 

direction, in meters from true north, in blue.
22

Appendix 2. Time series plots of variations in water level, currents, and temperature 

through time from the acoustic Doppler current profiler (ADCP). 

Appendix 2.1. Tide, current, and water temperature data for the 2008 summer from the ADCP. A, Tidal height, in 

meters. B, Near-surface current speeds and directions, in meters per second from true north. C, Mid-depth current 

speeds and directions, in meters per second from true north. D, Near-bed current speeds and directions, in meters 

per second from true north. E, Water temperature, in degrees Celsius. 
23

Appendix 2.2. Tide, current, and water temperature data for the 2008-2009 winter from the ADCP. A, Tidal height, in 

meters. B, Near-surface current speeds and directions, in meters per second from true north. C, Mid-depth current 

speeds and directions, in meters per second from true north. D, Near-bed current speeds and directions, in meters 

per second from true north. E, Water temperature, in degrees Celsius. 
24

Appendix 2.3. Tide, current, and water temperature data for the 2009 summer from the ADCP. A, Tidal height, in 

meters. B, Near-surface current speeds and directions, in meters per second from true north. C, Mid-depth current 

speeds and directions, in meters per second from true north. D, Near-bed current speeds and directions, in meters 

per second from true north. E, Water temperature, in degrees Celsius. 
25

Appendix 2.4. Tide, current, and water temperature data for the 2009-2010 winter from the ADCP. A, Tidal height, in 

meters. B, Near-surface current speeds and directions, in meters per second from true north. C, Mid-depth current 

speeds and directions, in meters per second from true north. D, Near-bed current speeds and directions, in meters 

per second from true north. E, Water temperature, in degrees Celsius. 
26

Appendix 3. Time series plots of variations in water temperature and salinity through 

time from the conductivity and temperature (CT) sensor. 

Appendix 3.1. Water temperature and salinity data for the 2008 summer from the CT. A, Water temperature, in 

degrees Celsius. B, Salinity, in Practical Salinity Units (PSU). 
27

Appendix 3.2. Water temperature and salinity data for the 2008-2009 winter from the CT. A, Water temperature, in 

degrees Celsius. B, Salinity, in Practical Salinity Units (PSU). 

Appendix 3.3. Water temperature and salinity data for the 2009 summer from the CT. A, Water temperature, in 

degrees Celsius. B, Salinity, in Practical Salinity Units (PSU). 
28

Appendix 3.4. Water temperature and salinity data for the 2009-2010 winter from the CT. A, Water temperature, in 

degrees Celsius. B, Salinity, in Practical Salinity Units (PSU). 
29

Appendix 4. Time series plots of variations in turbidity through time from the optical 

backscatter sensor (OBS). 

Appendix 4.1. Turbidity data for the 2008 summer from the OBS, in National Turbidity Units (NTU). 

Appendix 4.2. Turbidity data for the 2008-2009 winter from the OBS, in National Turbidity Units (NTU). 

Appendix 4.3. Turbidity data for the 2009 summer from the OBS, in National Turbidity Units (NTU). 
30

Appendix 4.4. Turbidity data for the 2009-2010 winter from the OBS, in National Turbidity Units (NTU). 
31

Appendix 5. Suggested RD Instruments 1200 kHz ADCP deployment parameters 

for Kalaupapa National Historical Park. 

RD Instruments 1200 kHz Workhorse Monitor upward-looking acoustic Doppler current profiler 

 

What to enter in RD Instruments’ “PlanADCP” software under the “ADVANCED” tab:

 ENVIRONMENT SET-UP

 Depth of Transducer: 17 m 

 Salinity: 35 ppt 

 Magnetic Variation: 10 deg

 Temperature: 20 deg (this is only used for battery calculations) 

 DEPLOYMENT TIMING SET-UP

 Deployment Duration: 90 days 

 Ensemble Interval: 0:05:00.00 

 Ping Interval: Auto

 Ping Immediately After Deployment: unchecked 

 First Ping Date: DD-MMM-YYYY (start MMDDYY) 

 First Ping Time: HH:MM:SS (start HHMMSS)*** 

 

 ***-best to start at some round fraction of a day, for example, 00:00. 06:00, 12:00, 18:00 

 PROFILING TIMING SET-UP

 Pings per Ensemble: 100

 Number of Depth Cells: 20

 Depth Cell Size: 1 m 

 Mode: 1 (static, waves) 

 WAVES SET-UP

 Burst Duration: 10 min 

 Time Between Bursts: 60 min 

 EXPERT SET-UP

 Blank: 0.44 m 

 Ambiguity Velocity: 1.75 m/s 

What should result in RD Instruments’ “PlanADCP” file: 

 First Cell Range: 1.54 m 

 Last Cell Range: 20.54 m 

 Standard Deviation: 0.35 cm/s 

 Battery Pack Usage: 1.9

 Samples per Wave Burst: 1200

 Min. Observ. Wave Period (non-dir): 2.11 s 

 Min. Observ. Wave Period (dir): 3.25 s 
32

Appendix 6. Suggested SeaBird Micorcat SBE-37SMP CT deployment parameters 

for Kalaupapa National Historical Park. 

SeaBird Microcat SBE-37SMP pumped conductivity and temperature sensor 

 

What to enter in SeaBird’s “Terminal” software:

interval: 300 (sample interval, in seconds) 

 samplenum: 0 (clears memory) 

 txrealtime: n (no real-time time output) 

 outputsal: n (no real-time salinity output) 

 outputsv: n (no real-time sound velocity output) 

 storetime: y (log time) 

 navg: 4 (average 4 samples per burst) 

 refpress: 17 (reference pressure for salinity calculations) 

 syncmode: n (not synced to other sensors) 

 pumpinstalled: y (pump installed) 

 mmddyy: XXXXXX (current MMDDYY) 

 hhmmss: XXXXXX (current HHMMSS) 

 startmmddyy: XXXXXX (start MMDDYY) 

 starthhmmss: XXXXXX (start HHMMSS)*** 

 ds (to check settings, see below) 

 startlater (initiate deployment) 

 ***-best to start at some round fraction of a day, for example, 00:00. 06:00, 12:00, 18:00 

What SeaBird’s “Terminal” should display following DS command:

 SBE37-SMP V X.XX SERIAL NO. XXXX DD MMM YYYY HH:MM:SS

 logging not started 

 sample interval = 300 seconds 

 samplenumber = 0, free = XXXXXX 

 do not transmit real-time data 

 do not output salinity with each sample 

 do not output sound velocity with each sample 

 store time with each sample 

 number of samples to average = 4 

 reference pressure = 17.0 db 

 serial sync mode disabled 

 internal pump installed 
33

Appendix 7. Suggested Aquatec/Seapoint 210-TY OBS deployment parameters for 

Kalaupapa National Historical Park. 

Aquatec/Seapoint 210-TY self-logging optical backscatter sensor 

What to enter in Aquatec’s “AQUAtalk” software under the “Deploy” tab:

 

 Set Date and Time: set via computer time 

 Logging Start: XX:XX (start HH:MM)*** 

 Channels: select “Turbidity” and “Battery”

 Averaging: do not select 

 Gain: auto 

 Enable Burst Sampling: Checked 

 Sampling Interval: 5 minutes 

 Samples per Burst: 8

 Sampling Frequency: every 1 second 

 

 ***-best to start at some round fraction of a day, for example, 00:00. 06:00, 12:00, 18:00