Marine Boundary Working Group 

Federal Geographic Data Committee

Marine Managed Areas:

Best Practices for Boundary Making
Acknowledgments

These guidelines, written by the Federal Geographic Data Committee’s (FGDC) 

Marine Boundary Working Group and sponsored by the National Marine 

Protected Areas (MPA) Center, represent the current best practices for marine 

boundary delimitation. The handbook was prepared by a field of experts, including 

cartographers, lawyers, regulators, spatial data analysts, surveyors, and other 

professionals with an interest in marine management. Coordination and funding 

of the printing of this publication were provided by the National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

Handbook Contributors

Suzanne Bass, NOAA Office of the General Counsel for Marine Services

Brie Bierman, NOAA Coastal Services Center

Cindy Fowler, NOAA Coastal Services Center

Rob Hudson, Photo Science, Inc.

Robert E. Johnson, Minerals Management Service

Stephen G. Kopach, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Donna McCaskill, NOAA Coastal Services Center

Joshua Murphy, NOAA Coastal Services Center

Richard Naito, Minerals Management Service

Henry Norris, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

J. Ashley Roach, U.S. Department of State

Paul H. Rogers, Minerals Management Service

Dr. Robert W. Smith, Geographic Consultant (formerly U.S. Department of State)

David Stein, NOAA Coastal Services Center

Mitchell Tartt, NOAA National Marine Sanctuary Program

Leland Thormahlen, Minerals Management Service (retired)

Douglas Vandegraft, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Ole Varmer, NOAA Office of the General Counsel for International Law

Meredith Westington, NOAA Office of Coast Survey

Editor

Gerald G. Esch, NOAA Coastal Services Center

Graphic Designer

Frank Ruopoli, NOAA Coastal Services Center

June 2006
Table of Contents

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

An Overview of Marine Managed Areas and Marine Boundary Making. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Best Practices for Boundary Making. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Step 1. Conceptualize the Marine Managed Area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

 A. Determine Authority for Boundary Making. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

 B. Determine Existing Boundaries and Jurisdictions in the Region. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

 C. Work with Agencies and Stakeholders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

 D. Develop a Model of the Boundary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Step 2. Describe the Marine Boundary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

 A. Write the Boundary Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

 B. Work with Your Mapping Professional. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 

Step 3. Generate the Digital Boundary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

 A. Find the Best Available Data for Digital Boundary Development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

 B. Create and Document the Digital Boundary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

 C. Provide Digital Boundary Information to the Public. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Appendixes

A. Examples – Marine Managed Area Legal Descriptions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

B. Primer on Marine Boundaries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

C. Boundary Line Types. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

D. Checklist for Writing a Boundary Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

E. Reference Section. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

F. Federal Data Sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

G. Acronyms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Figures and Tables

Figures

1. State and Federal Marine Managed Areas in the Florida Keys. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

2. Boundaries Delimiting U.S. Maritime Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3. Boundaries between Private Uplands and State Submerged Lands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

4. Map Showing the Existing MMAs in Tampa Bay. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

5. Potential Rights That May Be Represented in a Boundary Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

6. Examples of Land–Water and Water Only MMAs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

7. Map Scale Representation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

8. Rhumb Line Connecting Miami with San Francisco. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Tables

1. A Sampling of Marine Managed Areas and Their Responsible Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2. Organizational Approach for Inventorying Multiple MMAs within a Region. . . . . . . . . . . 17

3. Steps for Engaging Stakeholders in Decision Making. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4. Shoreline Terms for Marine Boundaries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

5. Common Boundary Components and Characteristic Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

6. Coordinate Notations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

7. The Relation of Map Scale to Coordinate Precision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

8. Relationship of Bearings and Azimuths. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

In memory of

Paul H. Rogers

1944–2006

This handbook is dedicated to the memory of Paul H. Rogers for the numerous 

contributions he made to marine boundaries.

Rogers was born in Brookfield, Missouri, in 1944. He earned a B.S. degree in 

geography at the University of Kansas, where he also entered the master’s program.

For 30 years Rogers held various positions within the Department of the Interior’s 

Bureau of Land Management and the Minerals Management Service, where he 

was actively involved in surveying and mapping efforts. He applied his many years 

of experience and professional knowledge to promote mapping issues and was 

instrumental in the development of the “Implementation Plan for the Multipurpose 

Marine Cadastre.”

People who knew Rogers would describe him as professional, energetic, persistent, 

meticulous, dedicated, and always willing to help others. He loved his work, which 

was apparent by his attitude and the way he set about doing his day-to-day tasks. He 

was proactive, always seeking to resolve issues in a positive manner while never losing 

perspective or his sense of humor in the process.

Rogers truly lived the advice he so often gave others: “People can give you all kinds 

of gifts, but the most important gift is the one you give yourself—the gift of integrity.”

Paul Rogers lost his courageous fight against non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma on 

January 22, 2006. He is survived by his wife Donna and son Brian.
Introduction

Purpose of This Manual

A law or regulation for a marine area cannot have its fully intended effect if the 

boundary description is vague, inaccurate, or incorrectly represented on a map. 

For this reason, the authors of this manual have attempted to outline clear best 

practices for marine boundary developers, or those who write and map marine 

managed area boundaries.

This manual also attempts to ease the transition from traditional to modern mapping 

techniques for marine managed areas. Digital boundaries will provide managers and 

users of marine resources with accurate and readily available data—benefits that are in 

step with electronic-government goals.

These pages provide a short, useful guide—best practices—for writing boundary 

descriptions for federal, state, or local marine managed areas within U.S. waters and for 

developing those boundaries within a computer mapping environment, or geographic 

information system (GIS). Although many of the examples in this manual are 

federal, the development principles apply to state and local boundary making, and are 

appropriate for policy and mapping experts at all levels.

Boundary developers have learned the best practices represented in this manual from 

experience, including many hard lessons from resolving boundary issues:

“Experience indicates that it can average between 5 to 20 years to resolve a marine 

boundary issue. . . . Our approach to boundaries is to develop appropriate 

collaborative partnerships, look at the issue(s) surrounding a particular geographic 

area, gather all the relevant information, if available, which is sometimes the very 

problem, and . . . then perform the necessary effort to mathematically define the 

various alternatives and the areal measurements associated with them. Having 

a proactive and collaborative approach to boundaries has proven over and over to be 

the most effective and efficient method to resolving marine boundary issues [emphasis 

added].” (Thormahlen and others 2004) 

This manual attempts to provide guidelines to reduce boundary misunderstandings 

and litigation. Haste, inexperience, and lack of consulting with boundary experts are 

common reasons for poor boundary development. The lesson that this experience 

teaches is important: boundary developers must resolve or account for all boundary 

issues before they can develop effective boundaries. Heeding this advice and employing 

best technical practices are beneficial to creating effective marine boundaries.


How to Use This Manual

Follow the Best Practices

•	 This manual is organized—in general—by the best practices needed to delimit 

boundaries in the marine environment.

•	 Related best practices are organized under three broad categories, or steps—

Conceptualize the Marine Managed Area (Step 1), Describe the Marine Boundary 

(Step 2), and Generate the Digital Boundary (Step 3)—although the order of those 

tasks may vary. For example, GIS mapping work may begin at the same time as 

planning work.

•	 Boundary description writers (often legal and policy experts) will find the sections 

on conceptualizing and describing boundaries to be the most useful in their 

work. Mapping professionals will refer most often to the sections on describing 

and generating boundaries. This manual often uses the general term boundary 

developer in reference to either of these roles.

•	 Boundary developers (writers and mapping professionals) should understand the 

best practices of the whole process to develop effective and accurate boundaries. 

For this reason, an overall best practice for developing boundaries is to commit the 

resources of an individual or group to know, work on, and follow through on all the 

best practices listed in this manual.

Read the Appropriate Level of Detail

•	 Each section contains essential and direct guidance, as well as supporting technical 

information that provides more context and detail.

•	 Because marine boundary delimitation draws upon many disciplines—including 

law, surveying, cartography, public policy, and scientific and technical fields—even 

those experienced in boundary delimitation may need guidelines to navigate 

through the complicated process. Boundary developers should collaborate with 

experts in different aspects of boundary making and consult standard reference 

works listed in this manual.

Delimitation – The determination of a boundary. 

Delimitation includes all phases of boundary development.

A Note on the Terminology within This Work

Where appropriate, this manual defines important terms within the text or in text 

boxes, such as the word delimitation above. Following is a discussion of some of the 

more important concepts used throughout this manual.

This manual generally uses the terms marine boundary and limit interchangeably in the 

context of how to describe or fix the limits of marine managed areas. Readers should 

not confuse these terms with maritime boundary, which in the international context 

is the boundary between two countries where their maritime zones would otherwise 

overlap. Maritime zones refer to the zones off the coast of a country over which it 

exercises sovereignty (territorial sea) or sovereign rights (exclusive economic zone or 

continental shelf).

In the context of U.S. domestic law, the term boundary also refers generally to the fixing 

of a limit or extent of private or public property in dry terrestrial lands, inland waters, 

and tidelands, as opposed to submerged lands in which there are very limited private 

property rights or interests.

The next section explores the meanings of the terms marine managed area and marine 

protected area. However, a summary of the definitions that this manual uses would state 

that marine protected areas, which include no-take and other types of conservation 

areas, fall within the larger category of marine managed areas. Marine managed areas 

encompass both protected areas and those not necessarily established primarily for 

conservation purposes. Since the term marine protected area applies to many of the 

examples in this manual, protected often appears in the discussion, and readers can 

usually substitute managed for the purposes of this best practices manual. There are 

many parallels and overlaps of boundary terms, whether working with terrestrial lands, 

inland waters, tidelands, submerged lands, or marine zones. 

 
An Overview of Marine Managed 

Areas and Marine Boundary Making

What Are Marine Managed Areas?

Marine managed areas, in the broadest sense, are geographic areas designed to protect 

or manage resources within the marine environment. This manual employs a broad 

definition of marine managed areas to promote sound boundary descriptions that will 

benefit all jurisdictions within the coastal zone and marine waters.

These management areas exist in many shapes and forms and include such sites as 

national marine sanctuaries, fishery management zones, national seashores, national 

parks, national monuments, critical habitats, national wildlife refuges, aquatic preserves, 

and national estuarine research reserves. The areas can include vertical components of 

marine space: the seabed and what lies below it, the water column, the water surface, 

and airspace.

In a broader sense, marine managed areas can include areas not necessarily established 

for conservation purposes, such as shellfish closure sites, anchorage areas, no-discharge 

zones, sewage discharge areas, safety zones, and pipeline and cable corridors.

Whether marine managed areas shelter resources, allowing little, if any, human 

activity, or follow a design to enhance ocean use, they define zones for managing 

resources or activities.

Managed versus Protected

Executive Order 13158, signed on May 26, 2000, defines a marine protected area as “any 

area of the marine environment that has been reserved by Federal, State, territorial, 

tribal, or local laws or regulations to provide lasting protection for part or all of the 

natural and cultural resources therein.”

Because this definition excludes certain areas, and to calm public concern that protected 

zones meant no-take zones, the National Marine Protected Areas (MPA) Center 

employed the term marine managed area (MMA) in 2002. This term includes marine 

protected areas but creates a larger umbrella under which to include a wider range 

of marine areas. To promote the development of sound legal boundary descriptions, 

this best practices manual includes management areas not necessarily established for 

conservation purposes.


Who Creates Marine Managed Areas?

Any agency that has jurisdiction in the marine environment can create marine 

managed areas. A creating agency could be a federal, state, territorial, tribal, or 

local government—an independent agency, such as the Federal Communications 

Commission (FCC)—or a regional entity with resource authority, such as a fisheries 

management council. The U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Department 

of Commerce are the lead agencies in the designation of federal MMAs. The agency 

responsible for defining and creating a national system of these existing marine 

protected (or managed) areas is the Marine Protected Areas Center, established by the 

same executive order within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA). Individual state, territorial, and tribal governments work within their own 

mandates to create MMAs in their jurisdictional waters. In many cases, multiple 

levels of government work together to create cross-jurisdictional MMAs, or individual 

MMAs may have overlapping jurisdictions.

The MPA Inventory

The MPA Center maintains an inventory of marine managed areas to discover 

common threads and to establish a more focused definition of both marine protected 

and marine managed areas. This inventory (www.mpa.gov) contains federal, state, 

commonwealth, and territorial sites.

As the MPA Center adds more sites to the inventory, and as agencies designate 

additional marine managed areas in a finite amount of ocean space, jurisdictional 

overlaps will arise. For example, in the Florida Keys today, as in other areas, several 

boundaries overlap and share jurisdiction. Boundary developers and resource managers 

would benefit from a complete and accurate inventory of sites, as well as a diligent 

process for developing boundaries for new sites, to avoid jurisdictional conflicts and to 

enable effective law enforcement and management within marine areas.

Table 1. A Sampling of Marine Managed Areas and

Their Responsible Agencies

Types of MMAs Agency

Fisheries Management Zones,

Threatened and Endangered Species Protected 

Areas, and Critical Habitats

NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service 

(Commerce)

Marine Sanctuaries,

Ecosystem and Research Reserves

NOAA National Marine Sanctuary Program 

(Commerce)

National Parks, National Seashores, and

National Monuments National Park Service (Interior)

National Wildlife Refuges U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Interior)

Lease Blocks Minerals Management Service (Interior)

Disposal Sites, No Discharge Areas U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Military Restriction Zones U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. 

Department of Homeland Security

Manatee Speed Zones Florida Fish and Wildlife 

Conservation Commission 

Safety Zones State and Federal Law 

Enforcement Agencies

Native Fishing Rights Bureau of Indian Affairs

Aquatic Preserves States

Figure 1. State and Federal Marine Managed Areas in the Florida Keys

 
What Is the Outlook for Digital Depictions of Marine Boundaries?

The era of paper maps and charts created by hand is not far in the past. Only since 

the 1980s have computers become the mainstay in cartography, but the presence 

today of geographic information systems (GIS), electronic charting systems, and other 

electronic mapping tools ensures a digital future for the designation and interpretation 

of boundaries.

The rise of GIS and other technologies in the management and use of marine resources 

is also increasing the demand for digital boundaries. The official legal notice of federal 

MMA boundaries is published in the Code of Federal Regulations, but the depiction of 

these boundaries on digital charts will likely help law enforcement and the lawful use of 

such areas by the public and private interests.

This shift to electronic tools is a significant change and will become more important 

as MMAs increase in number and their boundaries begin to match or overlap. 

To ensure that MMA boundaries are ready for a digital future, this manual will 

outline steps necessary to create viable boundary descriptions that complement 

electronic mapping technologies.

Best Practices for 

Boundary Making

The best practices in this manual are those for creating boundaries for marine managed 

areas. The manual lists the best practices under three broad categories, or steps, that 

outline the general boundary delimitation process and the knowledge that a boundary 

developer must draw upon.

This manual will guide boundary developers—those who conceptualize, describe, and 

generate marine boundaries—and point them to information and resources they may 

need. The best practices follow a logical order, useful for illustrating the steps that take 

place in creating a boundary, but the distinct parts of this manual will likely blend 

together, occur in a different order, or take place simultaneously when put into practice.

Summary of Best Practices

• Create a defensible and inclusive boundary-making process with your 

organization by identifying a team to understand, work on, and follow 

through on all the best practices listed in this manual.

• Understand how decisions made by boundary description writers affect 

the ability to depict a boundary graphically.

• Have a proactive and collaborative approach to boundary making by 

including relevant agencies and stakeholders in the process.

• Employ a comprehensive process to assess the quality and availability of 

information suitable to support the boundary-making effort.

• Evaluate the scale of the source data or map to determine the appropriate 

precision for reporting measurements.

• Test newly generated boundaries for accuracy and completeness. 

Whenever possible, ground-truth boundaries.

• Publish the boundary description in appropriate government notices 

for public access.

• Publish data and metadata to the Web through appropriate 

government clearinghouses.

Summary of Best Practices

• Create a defensible and inclusive boundary-making process with your 

organization by identifying a team to understand, work on, and follow 

through on all the best practices listed in this manual.

• Understand how decisions made by boundary description writers affect 

the ability to depict a boundary graphically.

• Have a proactive and collaborative approach to boundary making by 

including relevant agencies and stakeholders in the process.

• Employ a comprehensive process to assess the quality and availability of 

information suitable to support the boundary-making effort.

• Evaluate the scale of the source data or map to determine the appropriate 

precision for reporting measurements.

• Test newly generated boundaries for accuracy and completeness. 

Whenever possible, ground-truth boundaries.

• Publish the boundary description in appropriate government notices 

for public access.

• Publish data and metadata to the Web through appropriate 

government clearinghouses.

Describe the Marine 

Boundary (Step 2)

Generate the Digital 

Boundary (Step 3)

Conceptualize the 

Marine Managed Area 

(Step 1)

 
Step 1:

Conceptualize the 

Marine Managed Area

Introduction

This step explores the context and circumstances surrounding the creation of a 

new marine managed area that a boundary developer should examine as part of the 

development process. The boundary developer should address the following questions:

1. What is the legal authority, policy, or law to create and implement the proposed 

marine managed area, or MMA?

2.What is the area of interest? What are the overlapping and surrounding jurisdictions 

(i.e., the study area)?

3. Who are the stakeholders affected by the proposed MMA?

4.What is the intended outcome of the MMA (e.g., ecological protection, individual 

species protection, pollution prevention, homeland defense, personal safety)?

5. What features will delineate the MMA (e.g., shoreline, buffers, submerged features)?

The boundary developer needs to determine the legislative authority for creating the area 

and create an inventory of the surrounding activities and jurisdictions, both on land and 

in the water.

A. Determine Authority for Boundary Making

Research is necessary to determine the authority for the MMA and its resulting 

marine boundary. Although, in general, acts of Congress and state legislation establish, 

protect, and assign management responsibilities for marine managed areas, a review 

of the scope of authority may express limits or restrictions that can affect marine 

managed area boundaries. 

Technical Considerations

Consistency with International Law

The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provides the framework 

for the U.S. and other coastal countries, or States, to prescribe and enforce laws 

consistent with international law. Generally, a coastal State has jurisdiction to develop 

regulations for MMAs within its territorial waters. Without question, the U.S. has 

jurisdiction to enforce such MMA regulations over U.S. flagged vessels, U.S. nationals, 

and others that may be subject to in personam jurisdiction in U.S. courts. However, 

the enforceability of regulations against the activities of foreign-flagged vessels and 

nationals must follow generally recognized principles of international law. For example, 

if the boundary of the MMA is within the territorial sea, then international law 

recognizes that the coastal State has full sovereignty over that area subject to the right 

of innocent passage of foreign-flagged vessels in the territorial sea.

Best Practices

• Gain a full understanding of the underlying statute’s scope of authority and 

jurisdiction before engaging in the development of a marine boundary.

• Ensure that the development of a legal marine boundary description for an 

MMA is consistent with local, state, U.S., and international laws that apply to 

that particular area of interest. For example,

• Enforcement of MMA regulations against foreign vessels and nationals 

must be consistent with international law;

• MMA boundaries and regulations should not limit innocent passage or 

other rights under international law;

• Boundary developers must consider the balance of responsibilities, 

rights, authorities, and jurisdictions under international law in various 

maritime zones; 

• Boundaries of U.S. federal MMAs must not exceed the 200-nauticalmile exclusive economic zone and continental shelf; and

• Boundaries for local and state MMAs must be within local and state 

jurisdictional waters.

Best Practices

• Gain a full understanding of the underlying statute’s scope of authority and 

jurisdiction before engaging in the development of a marine boundary.

• Ensure that the development of a legal marine boundary description for an 

MMA is consistent with local, state, U.S., and international laws that apply to 

that particular area of interest. For example,

• Enforcement of MMA regulations against foreign vessels and nationals 

must be consistent with international law;

• MMA boundaries and regulations should not limit innocent passage or 

other rights under international law;

• Boundary developers must consider the balance of responsibilities, 

rights, authorities, and jurisdictions under international law in various 

maritime zones; 

• Boundaries of U.S. federal MMAs must not exceed the 200-nauticalmile exclusive economic zone and continental shelf; and

• Boundaries for local and state MMAs must be within local and state 

jurisdictional waters.

Conceptualize the Marine 

Managed Area

• Determine Authority for 

Boundary Making

• Determine Existing 

Boundaries and 

Jurisdictions in the Region

• Work with Agencies and 

Stakeholders

• Develop a Model of 

the Boundary

Describe the 

Marine Boundary

Generate the 

Digital Boundary

Step 1: Conceptualize the Marine Managed Area

10 11
State – with an uppercase “S,” refers to a nation state or country.

state – with a lowercase “s,” refers to a state within the United States.

Example: To protect the coral reefs in the Florida Keys from destruction caused by 

ship anchoring, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 

established no-anchoring areas authorized by the International Maritime Organization. 

However, NOAA respected the right of innocent passage in its regulation and MMA 

boundary. A no-entry area would have been consistent with international law, as long as 

the regulation had recognized the right of innocent passage through a navigable portion 

of the territorial sea. Boundary developers determined that the passage of vessels over 

the coral reef was not a threat, and so the regulation addresses only the anchoring 

of vessels. The regulation identifies areas of reasonable anchorage outside of the noanchoring area but near the regular routes of navigation.

Consistency with U.S. Law

Designating federal areas within the limits of state submerged lands and waters raises 

significant concerns about the effect on the sovereignty of the states, Indian tribes, Alaskan 

native and village corporations, and territories, as well as the constitutional principle 

of federalism. Concerns also exist about the effects of regulations and management of 

MMAs on private property, particularly in certain states where private property rights 

may extend into the marine environment. As a result, those establishing MMAs, such as 

the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary, often refer to state or federal limits or 

boundaries in an effort to respect state, tribal, or native sovereignty or avoid constitutional 

problems. The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary has partnered with the State of 

Florida to ensure the coordination of all sanctuary activities with the state and Monroe 

County. This partnership works through a sanctuary advisory council.

This issue of state, tribal, territorial, or native sovereignty pertains only to MMAs well 

within the 12-nautical-mile territorial sea and is generally limited to those MMAs 

within 3 nautical miles of the shoreline. International issues become of greater concern 

for MMAs in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) or on the continental shelf beyond 

the territorial sea. The exceptions are those states that share a boundary line with 

Canada in the Great Lakes and those states and commonwealths that have a seaward 

limit of 9 nautical miles: Texas, Gulf Coast of Florida, and Puerto Rico. (See Step 1B, 

“Determine Existing Boundaries and Jurisdictions in the Region,” for caution on using 

disputed or imprecise boundaries in MMA descriptions.)

Marine League – A unit of length equivalent to 3 nautical miles.

Nautical Mile vs. Statute Mile – A nautical mile is a unit of length equivalent to 

the distance spanned by 1 minute of arc in latitude at the equator, or 1,852 meters. 

A statute mile is defined as a unit of length equal to 1,609.344 meters. One 

nautical mile is equal to approximately 1.15 statute miles. 

In addition, the scope of authority of a congressional act may reveal express limits or 

restrictions to MMA boundary delimitation.

Example: The withdrawal of submerged lands by the U.S. Department of the 

Interior’s Minerals Management Service under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands 

Act (OCSLA) (title 43, U.S. Code, sections 1331 and following) has been used 

to protect special marine areas such as coral reefs from the threats posed by the 

exploration and exploitation of oil, gas, and minerals. However, since the scope of 

US EEZ

Figure 2. Boundaries Delimiting U.S. Maritime Zones. 

See Appendix B for detailed descriptions. 

Step 1: Conceptualize the Marine Managed Area

12 13
OCSLA is limited to those resources and activities, such withdrawal would not 

provide the jurisdiction and authority to address threats to the coral reef area 

that may be posed by fishing, boat anchoring, groundings, treasure salvage, and 

other activities.

Example: The statutory authority for national parks is generally found in enabling 

legislation for each specific park. See title 16, U.S. Code, section 410gg, for enabling 

legislation for Biscayne National Park (www.nps.gov/bisc/manage/enleg.htm). The 

statutory authority for national wildlife refuges is similarly found in special acts of 

Congress or in the underlying organic authority, the National Wildlife Refuge 

System Administration Act of 1966 (title 16, U.S. Code, sections 668dd to 668ee). 

See Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska—Act of Dec. 2, 1980, 

Public Law 96-487.

Example: The National Marine Sanctuaries Act, or NMSA (title 16, U.S. Code, 

sections 1431 and following), provides broad express authority to NOAA, through 

the secretary of commerce, to establish national marine sanctuaries in the coastal 

and ocean waters and submerged lands over which the U.S. exercises jurisdiction, 

including the 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone, or EEZ (title 16, U.S. 

Code, sections 1431 and 1432 [3]). U.S. Department of Commerce (NOAA) 

authority under the National Marine Sanctuaries Act would not provide authority 

for an MMA in the high seas, which is beyond the reach of the national jurisdiction 

and sovereign rights of the U.S.

Consistency with Individual State (state), Territory, and Commonwealth Law

In the U.S., each state has the authority and responsibility for managing the submerged 

lands, waters, and living resources within its borders (CSO 1997). The public trust 

doctrine is an important part of the body of law that applies to this area. No one single 

public trust doctrine exists, only multiple applications unique to each state, territory, 

or commonwealth. The trustees of the law, the state legislatures, generally delegate 

their responsibility to the state coastal management agencies, commissions, or 

local municipalities. 

Public trust lands generally include those lands below navigable waters, tidelands, 

and shorelands of navigable lakes and rivers, as well as the land beneath the ocean, 

lakes, and rivers. Figure 3 shows that the boundary (legally, the tidal datum) between 

private and state ownership varies from state to state. The differences reflect historical 

conditions set upon the state at the time the state entered the union. After achieving 

statehood, each state creates laws that, if not in conflict with federal law, determine the 

ownership and rights associated with public trust lands (CSO 1997). Because each state 

and territory applies the doctrine uniquely, if the MMA in development lies in state or 

territorial waters, boundary developers must consult that state’s or territory’s laws and 

regulations. In addition, there are certain instances where private ownership can exist 

seaward of the historically established public–private ownership boundary.

Figure 3. Boundaries between Private Uplands and State Submerged Lands

Step 1: Conceptualize the Marine Managed Area

14 15
B. Determine Existing Boundaries and 

Jurisdictions in the Region

In this part of the process, the boundary developer should determine the existing 

boundaries and jurisdictions surrounding or overlapping the proposed MMA. Existing 

boundary lines may exist in a wide range of digital and paper formats, including 

proprietary file formats, historical maps and charts, and textual descriptions. Many 

federal agencies and coastal states are developing and publishing geospatial data in 

support of their marine management efforts.

Searching a state’s informational resources may provide additional data for the region 

of interest. Note that the information available will vary in age, scale, and quality, and 

many of the maps may have been generalized or cartographically altered and may 

not represent the exact legal position of a boundary. The boundary developer should 

consult the metadata, or data about data, to assess the condition of geospatial data sets. 

See Step 3B, “Create and Document the Digital Boundary,” for more discussion on 

metadata. Appendix F lists some federal data sources for boundaries and regulations. 

Best Practices

• Inventory and characterize existing jurisdictions and boundaries in the 

region of interest.

• Be aware that MMA legal descriptions that reference boundaries of 

neighboring states, sovereign States, or other jurisdictions may inherit any 

disputes or imprecision associated with those boundaries.

• Use GIS data or hard copy maps to assess the gaps and overlaps within the 

existing regulatory framework.

• Identify the ecological and socioeconomic effects of the proposed MMA.

• Refer to the legislation to determine the purpose of the existing managed 

areas and of the proposed MMA.

Best Practices

• Inventory and characterize existing jurisdictions and boundaries in the 

region of interest.

• Be aware that MMA legal descriptions that reference boundaries of 

neighboring states, sovereign States, or other jurisdictions may inherit any 

disputes or imprecision associated with those boundaries.

• Use GIS data or hard copy maps to assess the gaps and overlaps within the 

existing regulatory framework.

• Identify the ecological and socioeconomic effects of the proposed MMA.

• Refer to the legislation to determine the purpose of the existing managed 

areas and of the proposed MMA.

Technical Considerations

Inventory of Existing Boundaries and Authorities

One of the first steps a boundary developer should take is to identify all existing 

boundaries and authorities in and around the area of interest. This will identify all the 

potential stakeholders and provide the framework for collaboration. An inventory in 

the form of a matrix is one way to characterize the current regulatory framework of an 

area (see Table 2). 

Table 2. Organizational Approach for Inventorying Multiple MMAs within a Region (Tampa Bay)

Suitability Analysis

Using this type of regulatory characterization, boundary developers can analyze the 

existing conditions of an area of interest to determine the best possible placement and 

configuration of the MMA. This effort could take the form of a suitability analysis 

where overlaid maps or data layers show how the proposed MMA might align with the 

existing management framework. See Figure 4 for a map-based illustration of this type 

of assessment. 

General 

Description Geography Covered Responsible Agency Purpose

State, Federal, 

and Local 

Natural Resource 

Protection Areas

Throughout Tampa Bay U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Florida Department 

of Environmental Protection, 

Pinellas County Parks and 

Recreation Department

Recreation,

Ecological 

Protection

Federal Security 

Zones and 

Prohibited Areas

• MacDill Air Force Base 

• Sunshine Skyway Bridge

• Port Manatee 

U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security, Florida 

Wildlife Commission, Local 

Law Enforcement,

U.S. Air Force

Homeland 

Security

Transportation 

and Utility Rights 

of Way

• Intracoastal Waterway

• Egmont Key Utility 

Right of Way

• Howard Frankland

Bridge Transportation

Right of Way

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 

Florida Department of 

Transportation, Tampa Port 

Authority

Commerce

State and County 

Boating Speed 

Zones (not 

manatee-related)

• Pinellas Bayway 

Bridges C and E

• Tom Stewart Causeway

• Corey Causeway

• Fort DeSoto Park

Florida Wildlife Commission, 

Pinellas County Parks and 

Recreation Department

Boating Safety

Manatee Protection • Manatee County Florida Wildlife Commission Species 

Conservation

Step 1: Conceptualize the Marine Managed Area

16 17
Figure 4. Map Showing the Existing MMAs in Tampa Bay. Boundary 

developers should consider these areas when creating a new MMA.

C. Work with Agencies and Stakeholders

The boundary developer should work closely with stakeholders and agencies in the 

region when planning an MMA, being aware of affected groups and their concerns. 

According to a 2002 needs assessment of marine protected area (MPA) managers, 

“There is a broad consensus that participation of all stakeholders, including the local 

community, is critical if MPAs are to be effective.” By engaging stakeholders, decision 

makers invite them to be part of the solution, which can have many benefits:

•	 Stakeholders are an important source of information.

•	 Stakeholders who have been engaged in the process are more likely to accept the 

resulting decisions.

•	 Stakeholder participation can be a strategy to manage or minimize conflicts 

among users.

•	 Stakeholder participation can be an opportunity to advertise or foster 

ongoing support for a management plan or decision. 

(NOAA Coastal Services Center 2002)

Best Practices

• Involve the public to a greater extent than what is required by law.2

• Assess the history of a community (e.g., stakeholder dynamics) and 

consider the social, political, and economic environments affecting various 

stakeholder groups.1,2

• Assess the capacity of the lead agency and stakeholders so that factors such 

as time, money, and expertise do not become barriers later in the process.2

• Establish goals for the participation process early and communicate 

them clearly.2

• Know “how, when, and under what authority” for each step of the decisionmaking process.1

• Cultivate leadership at all levels (political, agency, interest group).1

• Communicate the big picture often so that participants do not lose sight 

of the goals, or develop unrealistic expectations about the results of 

their input.1

• Consider how maps are developed, what information they contain, and how 

and when they are used.1

• Commit key program staff members to the process from start to finish; they 

must be able to understand and influence the evolution of the process.1

• Design evaluation measures into the process to evaluate decisions and 

improve future efforts.1,2

(

1

Bernstein, Iudicello, and Stringer 2004; 2National MPA Center 2004)

Best Practices

• Involve the public to a greater extent than what is required by law.2

• Assess the history of a community (e.g., stakeholder dynamics) and 

consider the social, political, and economic environments affecting various 

stakeholder groups.1,2

• Assess the capacity of the lead agency and stakeholders so that factors such 

as time, money, and expertise do not become barriers later in the process.2

• Establish goals for the participation process early and communicate 

them clearly.2

• Know “how, when, and under what authority” for each step of the decisionmaking process.1

• Cultivate leadership at all levels (political, agency, interest group).1

• Communicate the big picture often so that participants do not lose sight 

of the goals, or develop unrealistic expectations about the results of 

their input.1

• Consider how maps are developed, what information they contain, and how 

and when they are used.1

• Commit key program staff members to the process from start to finish; they 

must be able to understand and influence the evolution of the process.1

• Design evaluation measures into the process to evaluate decisions and 

improve future efforts.1,2

(

1

Bernstein, Iudicello, and Stringer 2004; 2National MPA Center 2004)

Step 1: Conceptualize the Marine Managed Area

18 19
Technical Considerations

Both boundary developers and stakeholders benefit by bringing in local knowledge of 

the resources and human uses (NOAA Coastal Services Center 2002). Stakeholder 

buy-in often leads to compliance, a perception that decisions are legitimate, and an 

opportunity to educate participants about the issues involved (NOAA National MPA 

Center 2004). Furthermore, federal acts or regulations may require public comment 

if a federal agency’s proposed action significantly affects the quality of the human 

environment (e.g., legislation or another action that would establish new marine 

boundaries or change existing marine boundaries). Information about the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (title 42, U.S. Code, sections 4321 and following) 

and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (title 40, Code of Federal 

Regulations, parts 1500 to 1508) is available on the NOAA Web site: www.nepa.noaa.gov.

Stakeholder participation, although important, does not come without its challenges. 

Potential issues with stakeholder involvement may include delays in decision making, 

increased need for resources such as staff time and money, and tension among 

stakeholder groups. While increased stakeholder participation demands more resources 

and effort at the initial stages of MMA planning, this work can also save in the long run 

by increasing the likelihood that the plan will be approved, implemented, and enforced 

(NOAA National MPA Center 2004; Brody, Godschalk, and Burby 2003; Kelleher 

and Kenchington 1992).

Steps for Engaging Stakeholders in Decision Making

Boundary developers should plan carefully for stakeholder participation before 

launching into the process. Many items may become barriers to participation unless 

boundary developers sufficiently address these factors in the early stages of creating a 

participation strategy—and not as an afterthought (National MPA Center 2004). The 

information below highlights steps involved in engaging stakeholders in a participatory 

process, and questions to consider throughout each step. 

Table 3. Steps for Engaging Stakeholders in Decision Making

1. Set the Stage • Clarify Goals and Motivation 

− What are the goals for the MMA?

− What are the goals for participation and what, specifically, do you want from 

the stakeholders?

• Understand Underlying Authority

– What are the legal mandates?

– Who makes the ultimate decision?

– How much weight does stakeholder input have?

• Identify Stakeholders

− Who will be impacted (positively or negatively) by the decision?

− Will anyone’s livelihood be impacted? 

− Does anyone research this issue?

− Who may be indirectly impacted? 

− Who is involved in managing the issue, especially where overlapping jurisdictions 

are concerned?

• Assess Context

− What are the attitudes, perceptions, beliefs, and values of the 

stakeholders involved?

− What is a community’s past experience with, or perceptions of, management 

agencies? Other stakeholder groups? 

− What are existing methods utilized for public involvement (e.g., public notice, 

public meetings)?

• Assess Capacity

– Are there time or money constraints?

– Are staff members properly trained (e.g., facilitation, conflict resolution skills)?

 (Bernstein, Iudicello, and Stringer 2004; National MPA Center 2004)

2. Design the 

Participation 

Process

• Establish the level of stakeholder involvement (e.g., top-down process versus bottom-up 

process) required or desired given the factors listed above.

• Determine what participatory methods may be most appropriate given the goals 

of participation.

 – Gather information: focus groups, facilitated workshops; interviews, and surveys.

 – Distribute information: presentations to community groups, Web sites, 

 newspaper inserts, public service announcements. 

 – Deliberate: facilitated public hearings or meetings, citizen advisory committees,

 negotiated rule making, mediation processes.

3. Manage 

the Process 

and Decision 

Making

• Consider the political climate.

• Evaluate the presence or absence of effective leadership.

• Consider the role and timing of map making.

• Assess conflict management techniques.

• Manage stakeholder expectations by clearly communicating the stakeholder role in

 decision making:

− Is the process collaborative, consensus-building, or merely input for the agency?

− Where does decision-making authority lie?

− What happens to participant input once the process is over?

 (Bernstein, Iudicello, and Stringer 2004)

4. Evaluate the 

Process

• Evaluate both the degree to which the MMA is meeting its stated goals and the 

effectiveness of the participatory process itself. 

• Identify lessons learned about the process of engaging stakeholders:

− What worked well?

− What did not work well?

− How could this process be improved?

 (Bernstein, Iudicello, and Stringer 2004, National MPA Center 2004)

Step 1: Conceptualize the Marine Managed Area

20 21
D. Develop a Model of the Boundary

A boundary must meet the requirements, or purpose, of the MMA, be unambiguous 

administratively and legally, and serve both the user and mapping communities. 

Previous sections looked at an MMA’s underlying authority, existing boundaries in a 

region, and the rights and interests of stakeholders.

Here, the boundary developer should understand the legal, management, and technical 

consequences of using particular boundary components—including straight lines, 

buffers, shared components, shoreline, and geographic features and place names—and 

use the knowledge gained in previous sections to develop appropriate boundaries.

Technical Considerations

Often the boundary developer needs to reference the boundary to some existing natural 

feature, such as shoreline, or by using a spatial offset, such as the distance from a point. 

In some cases, the reference to a feature is helpful for locating the MMA. Considering 

the intent of the MMA, the tools used in marine navigation, and enforcement and 

management techniques may help the boundary developer choose whether a reference 

to a feature is appropriate. While physical demarcation helps enforcement and 

management personnel locate boundaries (with markers and buoys), the cost of this 

demarcation for large marine areas is prohibitive. For this reason, boundary developers 

do not demarcate most marine boundaries but rather delineate them on a map or in a 

geographic information system (GIS).

Best Practices

• Create boundaries that are clearly defined and thus easy to interpret. 

• Keep the user and intent of the boundary in mind, and make the 

boundaries and boundary information as simple as possible.

• Develop legally defensible boundaries by using unambiguous terms and 

precise locational references. 

• Review all existing boundaries and rules in the area of interest.

• Pay special attention to boundaries, or parts of a boundary, that are 

ambulatory. If these pieces move (for example, state seaward boundaries), 

then the boundary may need to be revised.

• Ensure that you are using the proper source data and name of the feature. 

The official repository of domestic geographic names data for all federal 

electronic and printed products is the Geographic Names Information 

System (http://geonames.usgs.gov). State-level boundary developers should 

contact their Geographic Names Authority for information on state 

practice (http://www.cogna50usa.org/authorities.htm).

Best Practices

• Create boundaries that are clearly defined and thus easy to interpret. 

• Keep the user and intent of the boundary in mind, and make the 

boundaries and boundary information as simple as possible.

• Develop legally defensible boundaries by using unambiguous terms and 

precise locational references. 

• Review all existing boundaries and rules in the area of interest.

• Pay special attention to boundaries, or parts of a boundary, that are 

ambulatory. If these pieces move (for example, state seaward boundaries), 

then the boundary may need to be revised.

• Ensure that you are using the proper source data and name of the feature. 

The official repository of domestic geographic names data for all federal 

electronic and printed products is the Geographic Names Information 

System (http://geonames.usgs.gov). State-level boundary developers should 

contact their Geographic Names Authority for information on state 

practice (http://www.cogna50usa.org/authorities.htm).

Common Boundary Components 

Several boundary components are common in the delineation of marine boundaries: 

straight lines, buffers, shared components, shoreline, and geographic features and 

place names. 

Straight Line – A straight line is the line of shortest distance between two points in a 

specified space. On a curved surface, such as the surface of the Earth, a straight line is 

called a geodesic line. Because boundary surveys in marine environments are expensive, 

a common practice is to develop the boundary using a nautical chart. These charts 

commonly use the Mercator map projection, in which all meridians and parallels 

intersect at right angles. This property makes a Mercator chart ideal for navigation. 

However, a straight line derived from a Mercator-based nautical chart is not actually a 

straight line, but rather an arc on the surface of the Earth. This type of line is called a 

loxodrome or rhumb line, and differs from a geodesic line in that it does not represent 

the shortest distance between two points on the Earth’s surface. A geodesic line appears 

as a curved line feature on a Mercator chart (see Appendix C for further explanation of 

boundary line types).

Also, Mercator projections distort area, and on a global scale this distortion increases 

with increased distance from the equator. At chart scale, the distortion increases with 

increased distance from the latitude of true scale. As a result, area calculations derived 

from boundaries delineated using a Mercator-based chart may contain inaccuracies. 

Straight boundary lines specifically defined as either geodesic or rhumb lines with 

visible on-water reference points are generally easier to enforce and understand than 

other types of boundaries.

Buffer – A buffer often describes a marine area surrounding a geographic feature or 

fronting a portion of a shoreline. The buffer projects a specified distance from a point or 

geographic or linear feature. Measurements of distance can range from feet or meters 

to miles, kilometers, or nautical miles. An example of a buffer might be all waters 

extending out from an island for a distance of 3 nautical miles. Computer-mapping 

software packages can assist in the development of buffers, but note that precise results 

may vary by software. 

Locating and enforcing buffers can pose problems, however. For example, a problematic 

buffer might include the description, “3 miles from the 1000-meter isobath.” Less 

sophisticated users may have difficulty locating the isobath and the distance from 

this feature. This reference has an additional complexity because the term isobath is a 

reference to a depth contour on a specific nautical chart developed on a specific date. 

Demarcation – The physical marking of the boundary line on the ground or on 

the water.

Delineation – The detailed portrayal of a marine boundary on a map or in a GIS.

Demarcation – The physical marking of the boundary line on the ground or on 

the water.

Delineation – The detailed portrayal of a marine boundary on a map or in a GIS.

Step 1: Conceptualize the Marine Managed Area

22 23
Charting professionals use point soundings to calculate depth curves, but using 

different parameters can ultimately create different isobath lines. Also, the bottom 

depth is constantly changing, requiring new depth surveys, new isobath calculations, 

and potentially a new buffer. For these reasons, the boundary developer should keep the 

intended user and navigation technology in mind before selecting a buffer as part of the 

boundary description. 

Shared or Coincident Boundary – In many cases, marine boundaries reference existing 

boundaries as part of their description. The boundary developer must understand the 

issues associated with the shared boundary before including it in a boundary description 

and the resulting digital boundary. Developing a boundary that shares lines with a 

boundary from a state or another agency is practicable only if those boundaries are 

undisputed and precisely defined within the MMA boundary description.

Shoreline – Marine boundary descriptions can cite shoreline of the mainland, islands, 

or islets, as well as shoreline features such as rocks, reefs, spires, pinnacles, points, 

capes, headlands, bluffs, or man-made features such as jetties. A shoreline boundary 

may also follow a river, going upstream from its mouth for a specified distance. 

Including the shoreline of inland waterways or lagoons as part of the marine boundary 

is also common.

Table 4. Shoreline Terms for Marine Boundaries

Shoreline is a common reference feature but one of the most complex to portray 

accurately. Ambiguities in a shoreline description can call into question the precise 

location of the MMA. Also, natural processes such as tides, weather, and climate can 

significantly change the location of the shoreline over time. If the MMA boundary’s 

intent is to reflect these natural changes, then using shoreline features in the boundary 

description may be appropriate. Boundary developers should reference the official 

tidal datum, such as the line of mean lower low water. The tidal datum should remain 

consistent for the entire description of the marine boundary, if possible (see Table 4 for 

acceptable and unacceptable shoreline terms).

Mapping the tidal datum requires some specialized and often expensive surveying 

techniques and, therefore, common practice is to select the shoreline data from 

the largest-scale and most current nautical chart (see Step 3, “Generate the Digital 

Boundary”). If the boundary developer uses the nautical chart, then the boundary 

description should contain the chart name, scale, and date, along with the tidal datum. 

The boundary developer should not select a shoreline from a map, photograph, or 

plat that does not clearly indicate the state of the tide, collection method, and date. 

The boundary developer must also understand that referencing the shoreline in the 

boundary description creates the additional burden of having to update the ambulatory 

shoreline continuously. 

Submerged Feature – Marine boundary descriptions can also employ submerged features 

such as depth contours (derived from seafloor topography), seamounts, reefs, banks, 

shoals, and shipwrecks. As is true with the other features, the purpose of the MMA will 

help determine whether referencing submerged features is appropriate. These submerged 

features may or may not be clearly marked on nautical charts, or they may be ambulatory 

and require that the boundary developer revisit the boundary periodically to make 

corrections. However, in some cases, the ambulatory nature is exactly the reason the 

developer would reference the feature in the boundary, such as to define natural resource 

areas like oyster reefs or mangrove marsh.

Other reasons exist to reference underwater features. For example, in the 1990s, NOAA 

began the preferred practice of including references to submerged lands and primary 

feature(s) it wished to protect, as well as the waters. NOAA now expressly includes 

specific references to named banks, as well as the surrounding waters and submerged 

lands. Although the use of coordinates makes it easier for the mariner to locate the 

boundary, reference to such features is helpful for underwater users. Both methods 

enhance the public notice and record and assist in enforcement actions against violators.

The following chart summarizes the characteristics of each boundary component and 

refers to relevant examples. These examples appear in Appendix A.

Good

• Mean lower low water (offshore and tidelands)

• Mean low water

• Mean higher high water

• Mean high water (tidelands and upland)

Ambiguous or Imprecise

• Shoreline

• Mean Sea Level

• U.S. Coastline

• General contour of the coast

• High water line

• Vegetation line

• Debris line

• Ordinary low water

• Ordinary high water (Inland waters)

Step 1: Conceptualize the Marine Managed Area

24 25
Table 5. Common Boundary Components and Characteristic Issues. The left-hand column 

refers to examples of marine managed areas that use these boundary components. 

Boundary 

Component Definition Jurisdictional Issues Digital Mapping Issues

Other 

Considerations

Straight Line

See Examples 

1 and 2 in 

Appendix A

The line of shortest 

distance between two 

points. See Appendix 

C for explanation of 

line types. 

This component is 

the easiest to create 

and enforce if 

properly defined. 

This component is the 

most easily mapped if 

properly defined. 

Using straight-line 

segments to create 

a simple polygon 

is easiest to depict 

and enforce, but 

a polygon may 

generalize the area 

you plan to manage. 

Buffer

See Example 1 

in Appendix A

A buffer is a 

boundary projected 

a set distance from 

a point or linear 

feature, such as a 

shoreline.

The reference feature 

may move, so this 

boundary type could 

be ambulatory. 

Most geographic 

information systems 

can easily create 

a buffer; however, 

not all buffers are 

necessarily alike 

because of the 

different ways of 

creating a buffer. 

Replicating this 

type of boundary 

component can be 

difficult. Defining the 

type of mathematical 

computation is 

critical to ensure that 

others can easily recreate the boundary. 

Shared

See Example 

2 in Appendix A

This component is an 

already established 

boundary line, such 

as the outer limit 

of a maritime zone 

or another MMA, 

including state and 

local MMAs. 

This component has 

no jurisdictional 

issues as long as the 

shared boundary is 

clearly defined (see 

other boundary 

components for 

possible issues). 

This component has 

no digital mapping 

issues as long as the 

shared boundary is 

clearly defined (see 

other boundary 

components for 

possible issues). 

Shared boundaries 

could be ambulatory 

or difficult to 

replicate and enforce. 

You must understand 

the nature of the 

shared boundary line 

before adopting it. 

Shoreline

See Example 

2 in Appendix A

This component is a 

line delineating the 

land–sea interface. It 

can be described by 

various tidal datums: 

for example, mean 

high water (MHW) 

or mean lower low 

water (MLLW). 

Shoreline is 

ambulatory and can 

be problematic to 

enforce if it is not 

clear to the public or 

enforcement officials 

where the boundary 

begins and ends. 

Shoreline can be 

used as long as 

it references the 

depiction on 

charted products, 

such as NOAA’s 

nautical charts. 

When describing 

shoreline, you must 

identify a tidal datum. 

Preferably, you 

should use commonly 

charted datums, 

such as MLLW or 

MHW. Avoid using 

ambiguous terms 

such as “coastline” or 

“shoreline” unless they 

are qualified.

Geographic 

Feature/Place 

Name

See Example 

1 in Appendix A

This component 

can be a variety of 

submerged, emergent 

marine, submergent, 

or terrestrial (landbased) features. 

Examples might 

include references 

to depth contours, 

seamounts, reefs, 

rocks awash, jetties, 

bridges, or an 

entrance to a river. 

References to 

geographic 

features are good 

for clarifying 

the intent of a 

boundary; however, 

it is always good to 

identify geographic 

coordinates for 

enforceability.

There are no digital 

mapping issues as 

long as properly 

defined geographic 

coordinates help 

locate the geographic 

feature. If a boundary 

follows a depth 

contour, data must be 

available, preferably 

on a nautical chart, 

to create the 

boundary line. 

A geographic feature 

can move or even 

disappear; therefore, 

your boundary could 

become ambiguous. 

Step 2: 

Describe the Marine Boundary

Introduction

This step provides guidance for writing a description of a marine boundary. A good 

boundary description uses clear, concise, and technically sound language to locate and 

depict the intended geographic area with such certainty as to exclude all other possible 

interpretations. The components of the boundary description need to abide by both 

legal and modern mapping standards to meet these goals.

The boundary developer must clearly state the extent of the area being described, 

the intent of the marine managed area (MMA), and the associated rights and 

responsibilities. As Figure 5 illustrates, the description may include potential rights in 

the marine managed area, such as wind energy and radio spectrum leasing within the 

airspace, fishing or other natural resources within the water column, sand and gravel on

the seabed, and oil and gas within the subsoil.

Figure 5. Potential Rights That May Be Represented in a Boundary Description

Navigation Rights

Riparian

Rights

Native 

American

Rights

Public

Access

Rights

Fishing

Rights

Mineral

Rigths

Development 

Rights

Water Surface

Water Column

Air Column

Seabed

Subsurface

Step 2: Describe the Marine Boundary

Credit: M. Sutherland 2003

26 27
Many of the standard protocols for land surveying, as well as the legal best practices 

of land boundary determination, apply to the marine environment. The boundary 

developer must first focus on the issues of significance to the marine environment and 

lay out the three sections of the marine boundary description: the preamble, the body, 

and any limiting or augmenting clauses.

The boundary developer must also work with a mapping professional—because the 

originating agency is responsible for the authenticity and accuracy of the data it bases 

its marine boundary description on. Throughout the boundary delimitation process, 

the boundary developer should keep in mind the following elements:

• MMA users, specifically native languages and customs 

• Access to information and the public notification process 

• The ability to demarcate the boundary or provide signage

• Legal defensibility

• Methods for enforcement

For a checklist that captures the documentation requirements of several approaches to 

boundary making, see Appendix D, “Checklist for Writing a Boundary Description.”

A. Write the Boundary Description

1. Write the Preamble of the Boundary Description

The preamble of a boundary description, often only one paragraph in length, contains 

vital information. The preamble states 1) the name of the boundary and the agency 

administering the marine managed area; 2) the general location of the area and the name 

of the state, territory, insular possession, county, borough, parish, municipality, township, 

range, meridian, city, town, or village, if applicable; 3) the purpose of the marine managed 

area; 4) the features to which the boundary applies (e.g., uplands, submerged lands, water 

column, water surface, and seabed); 5) and the adjacent jurisdictions. The preamble should 

also note any documents that provide information essential to the description, such as land 

orders, proclamations, deeds, charts, or maps.

2. Write the Body of the Boundary Description

The boundary developer must write a careful, unambiguous, and technically complete 

description of the boundary. The body of the boundary description presents the 

information necessary to describe the exact location of the marine managed area. Each 

detail, including punctuation and formatting, is critical for creating a clear boundary, and 

boundary developers must follow good practices for constructing those details to eliminate 

ambiguities. Creating a marine boundary poses some special challenges because of the lack 

of physical demarcation or “signposts” that are used in land surveying and because of the 

ambulatory or changing nature of the sea and the shoreline. 

The boundary developer must carefully choose the appropriate method for describing the 

boundary. An MMA can be divided into two types: those that have some shoreline or dry 

land component and those that do not (see Figure 6). The clearest, least ambiguous manner 

for describing all MMAs is through the use of coordinates. This is especially true for 

MMAs that lie entirely offshore. However, those MMAs that have some shoreline or dry 

land component may reference other boundaries and man-made or natural features as part 

of the boundary description. If this is the case, the boundary developer should use, if at all 

possible, fixed features such as lighthouses instead of features that can move, such as buoys. 

For examples, see Appendix A.

At all times, the boundary developer must keep in mind the precision or accuracy needed 

to meet the original purpose of the MMA, the end users whose activities are impacted, and 

the ease of enforcement of rules, all of which will help determine the appropriate method. 

Consideration and use of the tools of navigation are prudent substitutes for the signage 

and fences that are generally impractical in the marine environment, except perhaps for the 

landward component of an MMA.

The body of the description should always end with a statement on the size of the area 

(water and land separately, as necessary). See Appendix D for a checklist of these details.

Describe the 

Marine Boundary

• Write the Boundary 

Description

• Write the Preamble

• Write the Body of the

 Boundary Description

• Write the Clauses and 

 Certification

• Work with Your Mapping 

Professional

Generate the 

Digital Boundary

Conceptualize 

the Marine 

Managed Area

Step 2: Describe the Marine Boundary

28 29
Figure 6. Examples of Land–Water (left) and Water Only (right) MMAs

In land surveying, a point of commencement, which is usually a known reference 

monument on land, helps to locate a starting point for the boundary. Courses and 

distances are listed from the point of commencement to the point of beginning of the 

boundary description. Then a series of directions and measurements identifies other 

defining points on the boundary, including a return to the original point, which creates a 

closed area. In the marine environment, a known physical marker is often nonexistent, so 

a coordinate is used. In some cases where the boundary touches land, physical markers 

(e.g., the corner of a Public Land Survey System grid or an elevation monument) may be 

used as the starting reference point. This will tie the MMA boundary to the upland and 

tideland boundaries, facilitating a seamless onshore–offshore cadastre. 

Cadastre – A record of interests in land, including both the nature and extent of 

interests. Usually this means maps and other descriptions of land parcels, as well 

as the identification of who owns certain legal rights to the land. (Berry 1993)

3. Write Clauses and Certification

Boundary developers use limiting clauses or qualifiers to identify or preserve some rights 

or to recognize a previous conveyance. Limiting clauses or qualifiers can also grant or 

recognize a right (such as an easement) of a third party. For instance, the term subject 

to refers to a right or grant already in existence. Boundary developers often include 

qualifying clauses in the description to ensure continued passage with each successive 

conveyance. Augmenting clauses attach a right or privilege to the land or water area that a 

boundary developer is describing. The term together with adds rights specific to the land 

or water area. 

The boundary description’s certification includes the author and the author’s title, as well 

as the authoring agency and date.

B. Work with Your Mapping Professional

When describing a marine boundary, the boundary developer should work with a 

mapping professional (also a boundary developer) for technical guidance. Mapping 

professionals can include geographers, cartographers, geodesists, and surveyors, 

among others. Listed below are some of the technical issues that boundary developers 

must address.

Technical Considerations

Coordinate Descriptions

The least ambiguous boundary would be defined by a series of geographic coordinates 

stated in degrees, minutes, and seconds of an appropriate precision, with a clear 

description of the horizontal datum. An example coordinate is North 48°20’16”, West 

125°22’48”. Three recommended horizontal datums are the North American Datum of 

1983 (NAD83), the World Geodetic System of 1984 (WGS84), or the International 

Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF) of 1992–2000 (see “Datums” section below). If 

the marine boundary description references a shoreline, the description must also 

clearly state an official tidal datum, such as mean high water. International practice 

for describing linear distances requires the use of geographic or nautical miles as units 

offshore and statute miles onshore. For shorter distances, boundary developers should 

use feet or meters. Best practices always require a clear statement of measurement units.

Best Practices 

• Work with a mapping professional for technical guidance when writing 

a boundary description.

• Record geographic coordinates in degrees, minutes, and seconds.

• Use a precision (number of decimal places) that matches the originating 

chart, survey, or source data.

• Clearly state the horizontal datum, using NAD83, WGS84, or 

ITRF 1992–2000 (see “Datums” in Step 2B below for definitions of 

these datums).

• Annotate all measurements with a clear statement of units. 

• Describe shorelines with a clear statement of the tidal datum. 

• Define the type of straight lines that connect the geographic coordinates 

(see Appendix C).

• Include marine managed area references, such as water column, 

submerged lands, surface, and so on. 

• Keep the end-user and ease of enforcement in mind when defining 

the boundary.

Best Practices 

• Work with a mapping professional for technical guidance when writing 

a boundary description.

• Record geographic coordinates in degrees, minutes, and seconds.

• Use a precision (number of decimal places) that matches the originating 

chart, survey, or source data.

• Clearly state the horizontal datum, using NAD83, WGS84, or 

ITRF 1992–2000 (see “Datums” in Step 2B below for definitions of 

these datums).

• Annotate all measurements with a clear statement of units. 

• Describe shorelines with a clear statement of the tidal datum. 

• Define the type of straight lines that connect the geographic coordinates 

(see Appendix C).

• Include marine managed area references, such as water column, 

submerged lands, surface, and so on. 

• Keep the end-user and ease of enforcement in mind when defining 

the boundary.

Step 2: Describe the Marine Boundary 

30 31
Nautical Mile vs. Statute Mile – A nautical mile is a unit of length equivalent 

to the distance spanned by 1 minute of arc in latitude at the equator, or 1,852 

meters. A statute mile is defined as a unit of length equal to 1,609.344 meters. 

One nautical mile is equal to approximately 1.15 statute miles. 

There is no official standard international abbreviation for nautical mile. Some 

common abbreviations are NM, nmi, and nm (not to be confused with nm, 

official for nanometer).

Coordinates appear in a number of alternative notations (see Table 6), each of which 

has implications for accuracy and precision (see “Coordinate Accuracy and Precision” 

below). Many computer-based mapping systems store geographic coordinates in 

decimal degrees. In this notation, the degree units remain the same, but the smaller 

increments (minutes and seconds) appear as a decimal of a degree. For example, the 

above-mentioned coordinate pair would be North 48.3378°, West 125.3800°. Another 

common format for navigational equipment such as Global Positioning System (GPS) 

receivers or chart plotters is degrees and decimal minutes. In this notation, the above 

coordinate pair would be North 48°20.27’, West 125°22.80’. Several on-line utilities 

are available for conversion between these notations.

Table 6. Coordinate Notations. Decimal places vary depending on the level of precision.

DDD° MM’ SS.S” Degrees, Minutes, and Seconds

DDD° MM.MMM’ Degrees and Decimal Minutes

DDD.DDDDD° Decimal Degrees

Map Scale

Map or chart scale is the proportion between a length on a map or chart and the 

corresponding length on the Earth (see figure 7), and is usually expressed as a ratio 

(e.g., 1:24,000). Large-scale maps and charts, such as 1:10,000, depict smaller areas 

of the Earth (e.g., Key West Harbor) than do small-scale maps and charts, such 

as 1:1,000,000, which depict large areas (e.g., the Gulf of Alaska). This seemingly 

backwards way of defining scale is easy to understand using the following illustration: 

1:1,000,000 and 1:10,000 scales are actually the fractions 1/1,000,000 and 1/10,000. 

These translate into 0.000001 and 0.0001 respectively, with 0.000001, the small scale, 

being much smaller than 0.0001, the large scale. Note that all maps depict only selected 

physical features, and the symbols used for those features are often displaced and 

proportionally larger, especially as the map or chart scale becomes smaller.

Figure 7. Map Scale Representation

Map Projections

A map projection is a mathematical model that transforms the locations of features on 

the Earth’s curved surface to locations on a two-dimensional surface (ESRI 2001). All 

maps and nautical charts are “distortions of the truth,” since map and chart projections 

cannot preserve the true spatial relationships among features in a three-dimensional 

world when they are portrayed on a two-dimensional surface.

Note that many projected coordinate systems are in use today for describing marine 

boundaries. Examples of these are the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) and 

State Plane Coordinate System (SPCS). Mapping professionals commonly use these 

planar systems on land, but the systems can be problematic if used offshore. This is 

especially true for large areas that may cross zones and whose mapped area will become 

distorted over distance. Boundary developers for MMAs with land components may 

need to address this issue. Fortunately, computer mapping programs have standard 

algorithms that can convert between coordinate systems. 

Coordinate Accuracy and Precision

Accuracy and precision are key elements in defining and portraying marine 

boundaries. The source map or technology that the boundary developer uses for the 

boundary survey will dictate the inherent level of accuracy, which in turn should 

dictate boundary and coordinate precision, or the intent of the MMA may dictate 

the boundary precision. Boundary developers should pay particular attention to 

the precision that geographic information system (GIS) technologies can produce 

from various source data. Specifically, GIS technologies may generate map data with 

precision values that are not supported by the source data. Note that precision and 

accuracy are different terms with different meanings. For example, a map could be 

highly precise but inaccurate.

1:500,000

0 5 10 20 30 40

Miles

1 inch equals 7.89 statute miles

Representative Fraction

Scale Bar

Statement of Equivalency

Step 2: Describe the Marine Boundary 

32 33
Accuracy refers to how a mapped boundary matches its exact position on the surface 

of the Earth and is dictated by factors such as the scale of the map or the accuracy of 

the survey instrument used to develop the boundary. For example, a map at a scale of 

1:24,000 that meets national map accuracy standards has a horizontal accuracy of 

± 40.00 feet (see Table 7).

Precision refers to the exactness with which a boundary can be realistically described 

in a boundary description or on a map. For example, if the user uses the decimal degree 

notation and carries out the coordinate to four decimal places, then the horizontal 

accuracy is within ± 36.432 feet. Three decimal places would imply a horizontal 

accuracy of ± 364.32 feet. Coordinate precision should reflect the accuracy of the 

source map or boundary survey. Any attempt to use more decimal places would create 

false accuracy in the boundary’s location. Because of the many inherent complexities in 

mapping in the marine environment, the boundary developer is responsible for selecting 

a level of precision that best matches the source data. 

Table 7. The Relation of Map Scale to Coordinate Precision

MAP ACCURACY

National Map Accuracy 

Standard

CORRESPONDING COORDINATE PRECISION *

Map Scale Map 

Accuracy

Precision in Degrees (D), 

Minutes (M), Seconds (S)

Precision in Decimal Degrees 

(DD)

1:1,200 ± 3.33 feet DDD MM SS.SS ≈ 1.01 feet DDD.DDDDD ≈ 3.6432 feet 

1:10,000 ± 27.78 feet DDD MM SS.S ≈10.1 feet DDD.DDDD ≈ 36.432 feet

1:24,000 ± 40.00 feet DDD MM SS ≈ 101 feet DDD.DDDD ≈ 36.432 feet

1:100,000 ± 166.7 feet DDD MM SS ≈ 101 feet DDD.DDD ≈ 364.32 feet

Degrees of latitude and longitude are only equivalent at the 

Equator. Closer to the poles, the distance between meridians 

of longitude decreases. 

DDD.DD ≈ 3,643.2 feet

DDD.D ≈ 36,432 feet

* A best practice is not to exceed the source data’s inherent level of horizontal accuracy (map accuracy) by overstating 

coordinate precision. However, the boundary developer must decide whether a slight overstatement of precision is 

acceptable (as illustrated in some examples in this table). The mapping professional should guide this decision.

Datums 

Boundary developers must reference all coordinates to a specific datum or the 

coordinates’ accuracy and precision will be meaningless. The two principal types of 

datums are horizontal and vertical. 

Horizontal Datum – A horizontal datum is theset of parameters and control points 

used to accurately define positions on the three-dimensional model of the Earth. The 

boundary description must clearly state the datum description alongside the coordinate 

list. In the U.S., the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83), the World Geodetic 

System of 1984 (WGS84), or the International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF) of 

1992–2000 are all acceptable horizontal datums and are considered to be equal to each 

other for most positional accuracy requirements. In the search for adjacent or existing 

data, the boundary developer may find other international, historical, or local datums 

but should use only the three horizontal datums named above. 

Vertical Datum – Vertical datums come in three categories: orthometric datums, based 

on gravity potential; tidal datums, based on tidally derived surfaces such as mean high 

or low water; and three-dimensional datums, realized through space-based systems such 

as the Global Positioning System. Orthometric datums include the North American 

Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88) or the older National Geodetic Vertical Datum 

of 1929 (NGVD 29). Examples of tidal datums include mean high water (MHW) and 

mean low water (MLW). Marine boundaries often reference a tidal datum. The tidal 

datum, which is not level, has its origins in the need to reference depth soundings that 

are taken at different stages of the tide during hydrographic surveys to a common level. 

References to shoreline should include a specific statement of the tidal datum, such as 

mean high water. Conversion between two vertical datums is not as straightforward as 

the transformation between horizontal datums. Therefore, this manual recommends 

that boundary developers use the tidal datum specified on the latest edition of U.S. 

nautical charts when developing an MMA, with references to features above or below 

sea level. On U.S. charts, this tidal datum is generally mean lower low water. 

Step 2: Describe the Marine Boundary 

34 35
Step 3: 

Generate the Digital Boundary

Introduction

Technological advances in mapping, such as the use of Global Positioning System (GPS) 

receivers and geographic information systems (GIS), have enhanced and complicated 

the development, implementation, and enforcement of boundaries for marine managed 

areas. Depleted marine resources, increased threats by man-made pollutants, and the 

need for exploring alternative energy sources are forcing many jurisdictions to increase 

law enforcement and begin comprehensive planning for the offshore environment. As 

a result, the need is great for accurate, useable, and accessible digital boundaries that 

define marine managed areas.

This step illustrates the process for generating digital marine boundaries, which can 

take place at any stage of the boundary development process. If a boundary developer 

writes a legal or official boundary description using the best practices suggested in 

this manual, digital boundary development should be uncomplicated. However, the 

practice of developing boundaries in a GIS is specific to the particular agency and 

software. For that reason, this manual addresses fundamentals such as digitizing and 

attribution, but not software-specific methods. This section points boundary developers 

to authoritative data sources and provides sound practices for developing, documenting, 

and disseminating digital boundary files.

A. Find the Best Available Data for 

 Digital Boundary Development

Boundary developers must have authoritative information sources to create good digital 

boundaries. As described in Step 1D, “Develop a Model of the Boundary,” the most 

commonly referenced components in marine boundary descriptions include shoreline, 

bathymetry, geographic features, and other boundaries. This section provides sources 

for those commonly referenced components, with Web links for downloading data. 

These sites are current as of June 2006.

Technical Considerations

Digital Data Sources

Shoreline – Shoreline is the line of contact between land and a body of water (Shalowitz 

1962). On NOAA nautical charts and surveys, the shoreline approximates the mean 

high water line; however, some states define shorelines differently. For examples of how 

shoreline is referenced in boundary descriptions, see Example 2 in Appendix A.

NOAA’s tidally derived shoreline is available at the following Web sites. 

Extracted Vector Shoreline Project

http://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov (see “GIS Products & Services”)

The Extracted Vector Shoreline Project provides public access to an accurate vector 

version of the coastline and shoreline data from NOAA nautical charts. The project 

targeted scales between 1:10,000 and 1:80,000, with emphasis on the larger scales. 

Software and processes designed by the Cartographic and Geospatial Technology 

Programs (CGTP) automatically extracted the vector data from the NOAA 

nautical charts.

National Geodetic Survey Shoreline 

www.ngs.noaa.gov/RSD/shoredata/NGS_Shoreline_Products.htm

The Remote Sensing Division of the National Geodetic Survey plans and acquires 

aerial photography and compiles shoreline data, primarily for nautical charts 

produced by NOAA’s Office of Coast Survey. Data from recent years are in digital 

form and are available through the division’s on-line mapping application.

T-sheet Shoreline Data – www.csc.noaa.gov/shoreline/

The NOAA Coastal Services Center’s T-sheet shoreline information is a highresolution vector shoreline it obtained from a historical multi-year collection of 

NOAA coastal survey maps. These data are available by coastal state.

Generate the Digital 

Boundary

• Find the Best Available 

Data for Digital Boundary 

Development

• Create and Document the 

Digital Boundary

• Provide Digital Boundary 

Information to the Public

Describe the 

Marine Boundary

Conceptualize the 

Marine Managed 

Area

Step 3: Generate the Digital Boundary

36 37
Bathymetry – Bathymetry is a measurement of the depth of the seafloor referenced 

from the water surface and is the marine equivalent to topography. Many digital data 

sources exist for bathymetry, including charted soundings, interpolated grids, and 

derived source data. 

The following Web sites provide references to commonly used bathymetric data sets.

NOAA Electronic Navigational Charts 

http://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/ (see “Electronic Navigational Charts”)

The NOAA Office of Coast Survey has been involved in the development of 

a NOAA Electronic Navigational Chart (ENC) suite to support the marine 

transportation infrastructure and coastal management. The NOAA ENC supports 

all types of marine navigation by providing the official database for electronic 

charting systems. Bathymetry is a key data set in the ENC, and a nonproprietary 

tool called ENC Direct, found on this Web page, will extract this bathymetry. 

Shoreline data are also available from this site.

Bathymetry, Topography, and Relief

www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/bathymetry/relief.html 

The NOAA National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) has an interactive 

database management system for the assimilation, storage, and retrieval of 

geophysical data, including marine trackline geophysical data, hydrographic 

(bathymetric) survey data, aeromagnetic survey data, multibeam bathymetric data, 

and gridded bathymetry and topography.

NOAA National Ocean Service’s Estuarine Bathymetry 

http://spo.nos.noaa.gov:16080/bathy/

NOAA’s estuarine bathymetry is a digital raster compilation of hydrographic survey 

data for selected U.S. estuaries. The 70 estuarine bathymetry data sets are available 

in both 30-meter and 3-arc-second resolutions. The gridded bathymetry is an 

interpolated data set representing the most up-to-date depth-sounding information 

that was available at the time of publication (1998).

Nautical Charts – http://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov

The NOAA Office of Coast Survey is responsible for developing the country’s official 

nautical charts. In addition to nautical charts, in paper and digital formats, the Office of 

Coast Survey creates products for the development of marine boundaries. 

Other Boundaries – A boundary description often references coincident and adjacent 

boundaries. Although there are many sources for these digital boundaries, it is critical 

that boundary developers use the original source for that boundary whenever possible. 

For an example of referencing coincident boundaries in a boundary description, see 

Example 2 in Appendix A.

The following Web sites provide references to commonly used marine boundaries. 

In addition, see Appendix F for a listing of select federal data sources.

Marine Boundary Working Group Data Portal – www.csc.noaa.gov/mbwg/

This data portal provides users with access to digital marine boundary data 

distributed by various federal agencies. The working group adds new marine 

boundary data to the portal as they become available.

Marine Protected Areas – www.mpa.gov

The data at this site are for marine managed areas (MMAs) in the MMA inventory 

database that meet the criteria set forth by the National Marine Protected Areas 

Center. Data collection is ongoing.

Geographic Features and Place Names – http://geonames.usgs.gov

Boundary developers often use prominent geographic features such as headlands, 

rivers, and offshore rocks as points of reference in a boundary description (see Example 

1 in Appendix A). Boundary developers should ensure that they use the proper name 

for a given feature. Federal boundary developers are required to use the U.S. 

Geological Survey’s Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) place names for 

their mapping requirements. For undersea feature names beyond 12 nautical miles, 

the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency maintains a database called the 

GEOnet Names Server (GNS) at http://earth-info.nga.mil/gns/html/index.html. 

State-level boundary developers should contact their Geographic Names 

Authority for information on state practice. A list of contacts is located at 

www.cogna50usa.org/authorities.htm

State, regional, and local agencies can provide useful digital data to an MMA 

boundary-making effort. Nongovernmental organizations and universities are 

other sources of information. The National States Geographic Information 

Council (NSGIC) (www.nsgic.org/index.cfm) home page lists individual state 

points of contact for geographic information.

Step 3: Generate the Digital Boundary

38 39
B. Create and Document the Digital Boundary

This section lays out the proper process for developing and documenting digital 

boundaries. Mapping professionals can develop digital boundaries in many software 

environments using standards and methods specific to their agency or industry. 

An agency responsible for digital boundary development should develop internal 

protocols or production rules to ensure consistency and boundary integrity.

After developing the boundary, the mapping professional must write metadata, or 

data about data, to document the content, quality, condition, process steps, and other 

pertinent information about the data set. Unfortunately, many data sets have little or 

no documentation. In the geospatial data world, this presents the immediate problem 

of not knowing critical information such as the data source, collection date and time, 

coordinate system, or contact information for questions. Furthermore, if a boundary 

developer were to use these undocumented data in the development of a boundary, the 

boundary’s validity would always be in question. Data for enforcement, regulatory, or 

jurisdictional purposes must be documented and traceable to a source.

Best Practices

• Use the official source for the referenced data when developing a digital 

marine boundary.

• Develop mapping specifications or a standard operating procedure for 

developing boundaries within an organization.

• Use the largest scale map or chart available (map with the most detail) 

when developing a boundary from a hard copy document.

• Use a projected coordinate system when performing any type of 

buffering or area calculation.

• Develop metadata using approved national standards to help strengthen 

the validity of the data. 

• Budget ample time in the data development process for 

metadata creation.

• Take advantage of tools that were developed for metadata creation. • Don’t feel restricted by what the Federal Geographic Data Committee 

(FGDC) metadata standard requires. There are places in the metadata 

for supplemental information.

• Develop more detailed feature-level metadata for complex boundaries. • Keep a detailed log of the entire boundary development process, 

including all process steps.

• Submit the metadata record to a clearinghouse registered with the 

National Spatial Data Infrastructure or other Web portal.

Best Practices

• Use the official source for the referenced data when developing a digital 

marine boundary.

• Develop mapping specifications or a standard operating procedure for 

developing boundaries within an organization.

• Use the largest scale map or chart available (map with the most detail) 

when developing a boundary from a hard copy document.

• Use a projected coordinate system when performing any type of 

buffering or area calculation.

• Develop metadata using approved national standards to help strengthen 

the validity of the data. 

• Budget ample time in the data development process for 

metadata creation.

• Take advantage of tools that were developed for metadata creation. • Don’t feel restricted by what the Federal Geographic Data Committee 

(FGDC) metadata standard requires. There are places in the metadata 

for supplemental information.

• Develop more detailed feature-level metadata for complex boundaries. • Keep a detailed log of the entire boundary development process, 

including all process steps.

• Submit the metadata record to a clearinghouse registered with the 

National Spatial Data Infrastructure or other Web portal.

Technical Considerations

Geographic Information System Requirements

Boundary developers may wish to generate MMA boundaries digitally by using 

GIS technologies. Many GIS software packages are available, and they vary greatly 

in breadth and complexity. However, boundary developers should focus on four 

fundamental considerations when generating digital information:

1. Technical Training – The mapping professional should be skilled in using 

the software package’s functions and have a sound background in creating and 

using spatial data. Specifically, this person should know and understand the 

relationships between the following:

a. Scale, precision, and accuracy

b. The effects map projections and coordinate systems have on distance 

and area computations (e.g., equal area projections versus Universal 

Transverse Mercator)

c. The effects of combining “best available data” that were created 

at varying time periods, resolutions, and purposes (e.g., overlaying 

1:500,000-scale habitat maps with survey data collected using GPS 

from a research cruise).

d. Topology and coincident boundaries (e.g., the creation of sliver 

polygons, overshoots, undershoots, and label errors)

e. The use of bearings and distances to generate boundaries (e.g., 10 

miles on a bearing of 270

0

 from the Cape Lookout Lighthouse)

f. The use of overlay or proximity analysis techniques to generate 

boundaries (e.g., overlay hard bottom habitat located in 30 to 50 feet 

of water, within the state jurisdictional boundary)

2. Source Material – Digital information will only be as accurate as the source 

material a mapping professional uses to create the boundary. For example, if 

a mapping professional were to digitize a boundary from a 1:80,000-scale 

NOAA Nautical Chart, the resulting data could only be as accurate as that 

source scale. This holds true as well for source data that are digital. GIS 

technologies may allow a user to “zoom in” and digitize information at a 

resolution greater than is appropriate given the scale of the source material. 

However, the resulting data are only as accurate as the source. For example, 

1:24,000-scale source material is only accurate to that scale, or approximately 

2,000 feet for every one inch on the map.

3. Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) – The mapping 

professional should employ a QA/QC method that ensures that all aspects 

of data handling, manipulation, and interpretation will support defensible 

decision making. A correctly implemented QA/QC process can aid in 

systematically capturing data that are accurate and compatible—and will form 

the basis for high-quality metadata. A properly employed QA/QC process can 

address six key areas of concern:

Step 3: Generate the Digital Boundary

40 41
a. Metadata are information that describe the origin, content, 

properties, and characteristics of spatial data. The existence of highquality metadata is critical to using GIS data with confidence (see 

“Metadata” section below).

b. Spatial accuracy is the degree to which the horizontal and vertical 

positions of features in the GIS database reflect their true position 

on the Earth’s surface.

c. Attribute accuracy is the degree to which descriptive items in the 

GIS database accurately describe the spatial features in the database. 

d. Logical consistency is concerned with the validity of the data, the 

establishment of correct topological relationships, the logical design 

of database objects, and compliance with minimum data standards.

e. Completeness of a data set refers to the extent to which the data set 

includes all existing features and their attributes, given the resolution 

(scale) of the data.

f. Geometric fidelity refers to the degree to which two separate GIS 

databases can be overlaid and a known point in each of the two 

databases will be spatially coincident.

Although all these database characteristics contribute to the accuracy of a given 

GIS layer, geometric fidelity and logical consistency are of extreme importance. 

Boundary developers should pay close attention to these issues in particular. 

4. Attribution – Digital boundaries require proper attribution to assist 

with future analyses and characterizations that may support the MMA. 

Standardized attribute schemas or feature-level metadata provide ways to 

describe the quality, currentness, and accuracy of each geospatial feature 

in a data set. Feature-level metadata differ from Federal Geographic Data 

Committee (FGDC) metadata in that they capture additional information at 

the “feature level” (that is, a segment of a boundary). Since marine boundaries 

often come from various sources, feature-level metadata will capture this 

information and ensure data integrity and utility.

Examples of feature-level metadata may include attributes such as area, date, 

datum, scale, site, and status. Mapping professionals can capture feature-level 

metadata, or data attribution, in the “entity and attribute” section of the 

metadata record (see section below). Boundary developers should use the 

FGDC Cadastral Data Content Standard to aid in the development of attribute 

schemas and data dictionaries for marine boundaries. 

Metadata – Data Documentation

Metadata are a component of data that describe the data. Imagine trying to find a book 

in the library without the help of a card catalog or computerized search interface. These 

information sources are essentially metadata about the books housed at that library or 

other libraries. Metadata for a geospatial data set are similar in that they describe the 

content, quality, condition, and other characteristics of the data—answering the who, 

what, when, where, why, and how about a data set. Without proper documentation, a 

data set is incomplete.

Critical metadata elements for the boundary developer – The FGDC Content 

Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (version 2.0) spells out mandatory elements for 

a metadata record. Marine boundary metadata developers must pay close attention to 

the following elements, because they will help end users better understand some of the 

unique aspects of marine boundary data.

Title – The name of the data set, which must be as descriptive as possible. 

Originator – The organization or individual who developed the data set. This 

element is critical because it assigns responsibility for the data in question. Users 

of marine boundary data need to know the originator to confirm the validity of 

the data.

Status – The state of the data set. This answers the question of whether an agency 

has approved or sanctioned the data.

Use Constraints – Restrictions and legal prerequisites for using the data set. This 

statement should convey how users could employ the data. Boundary developers 

should consult with their legal offices to craft some standardized language for this 

element.

Horizontal Positional Accuracy – An estimate of the accuracy of horizontal 

positions of spatial objects in a data set. This element is particularly important for 

enforcing boundary encroachments.

Source Scale – The scale of a boundary or map from which a data set is derived. 

Typically, the larger the scale (more detailed), the more accurate the boundary. 

Projection – The name of the map projection used to present the data.

Horizontal Datum – The reference system that defines the coordinates of a data set.

Vertical Datum – The reference frame or system from which vertical distances 

(altitudes or depths) are measured. The FGDC metadata standard refers to a 

vertical datum as a vertical coordinate system.

Process Description – An explanation of the steps a boundary developer 

performed to create the boundary, as well as the techniques, parameters, and 

reference to a published or internal protocol.

Supplemental Information – Supplemental information is a catchall element that 

includes any other descriptive information about the data set. 

Entity and Attribute Information – The description of the entities, attributes, 

attribute values, and related characteristics encoded in a data set. These elements 

provide the meaning of a data set and should be well thought out or even 

standardized before development. 

Step 3: Generate the Digital Boundary

42 43
Resources – The following Internet sites provide additional information about metadata:

Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Home Page – www.fgdc.gov

Home page of the FGDC, which links to information about standards, tools, 

the National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse, ways to submit metadata to a 

clearinghouse, and many other metadata issues.

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Metadata in Plain Language 

http://geology.usgs.gov/tools/metadata/tools/doc/ctc/

This interview-style document from the USGS provides plain language 

descriptions of the FGDC standard elements. 

The FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (CSDGM) 

www.fgdc.gov/standards/standards_publications/index_html

This page has links to download the CSDGM in various formats, including text 

and portable document format (PDF) versions.

Graphical Version of the Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata

http://biology.usgs.gov/fgdc.metadata/version2/ 

This graphical version is similar to the one included with the workbook and is one 

of the best tools available for understanding the structure of the FGDC metadata 

standard. Different colors and graphical styles are used to put an emphasis on 

different element types.

The NOAA Coastal Services Center’s Coastal Metadata Web Site 

www.csc.noaa.gov/metadata/

This Web site has information about standards, tools, training materials, and 

partnership and funding opportunities.

In addition to generating metadata about the MMA boundary, boundary developers 

should keep detailed notes on their methods, decisions, and courses of action in the 

mapping process. This could be a simple history file that chronologically records actions 

taken to create the boundary, capturing the nuances of the process that may get lost in a 

metadata record or forgotten with all the details of the effort. Entries in notes like this 

may address these issues:

• Why boundary developers chose a certain data set over another data set

• What data sets they used in an overlay process to produce an intermediate data set

• Who decided that one boundary alternative was more appropriate than another—

and when.

The notes can be as detailed as the boundary developer wishes to make them. Along 

with metadata, these notes will complete the documentation that will describe both the 

process and resulting boundary information for users and stakeholders.

C. Provide Digital Boundary Information to the Public

The boundary developer should follow a process for sharing digital boundaries with 

others who can use it. Since data sharing is a critical component of an agency’s data 

management system, a developer should make digital boundaries available through the 

Internet as soon as possible. The developer can make a boundary available either on an 

agency home page or through some of the larger state and U.S. data-sharing initiatives. 

Some effective ways to share digital boundary data are as follows:

• Make FGDC-compliant metadata available on the National Spatial Data 

Infrastructure (NSDI) Clearinghouse system. The NSDI Clearinghouse is 

a decentralized system of servers, located on the Internet, that contain fieldlevel descriptions of available digital spatial data. This descriptive information 

(metadata) is in a standard format to facilitate queries and provide a consistent 

presentation across multiple participating sites. Boundary developers can place 

metadata on the NSDI Clearinghouse by submitting to existing nodes, or metadata 

servers, on the system or by creating their own node. Information about how to 

participate in the clearinghouse system is located at www.fgdc.gov/dataandservices/. 

• Boundary developers can also post metadata directly to the E-Gov Geospatial 

One-Stop (GOS) Portal. The portal is a catalog of geospatial information, 

containing thousands of metadata records, downloadable data sets, images, map 

files, links to clearinghouses, live maps, features, and catalog services, and more. 

Government agencies and individuals submit metadata records to the portal, 

located at www.geodata.gov, or the portal can harvest the data from geospatial 

clearinghouses.

• Another way to share boundary data with the public is to inform the FGDC’s 

Marine Boundary Working Group, which will post links to the data to its boundary 

portal located at www.csc.noaa.gov/mbwg/. Additionally, boundary developers can 

register data and metadata for marine protected areas at www.mpa.gov.

By providing metadata to the above systems, a boundary developer does not have to 

release the actual digital data. The metadata can simply serve as a way for others to 

discover existing data sets. The responsible agency can decide how to release the data.

Step 3: Generate the Digital Boundary

44 45
Appendix A:

Examples – Marine Managed Area Legal Descriptions

The following examples are hypothetical marine managed area boundary descriptions, 

which follow many of the best practices found throughout the handbook. Specifically, 

these descriptions contain all the boundary components listed in Table 5, “Common 

Boundary Components and Characteristic Issues.” Note that stated distances and areas 

are presented for illustration only and are not necessarily accurate.

EXAMPLE 1 – Seagull Islands Marine Managed Area

Preamble

The following is a description of the boundary of the Seagull Islands Marine Managed 

Area (MMA), located in the Mitchell Islands in Southeastern Lakasa. The MMA lies 

in federal waters, approximately five miles southwest of the City of Umbrella Harbor, 

State of Lakasa, within the Gulf of Purdue, North Pacific Ocean. The Seagull Islands 

MMA is administered by the U.S. Fish and Park Administration, as authorized by 

Public Law 95-266 of August 18, 1995. The purpose of the Seagull Islands MMA is to 

protect seabird and marine mammal habitat. The MMA includes the Seagull Islands, 

Otter Rocks, all rocks and islets, the water column, and underlying seabed within a 

rectangular area. The base map used to delimit this boundary is the 1:60,000-scale 

National Charting Agency (NCA) nautical chart “Seagull Islands”, dated June 1990. 

The boundary of the Seagull Islands MMA is more particularly described in 

coordinates referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83) as follows:

Body

COMMENCING AT U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey station “OLE”, located within 

the City of Umbrella Harbor on a bluff overlooking the shoreline of Don Harbor at 

latitude North 59 DEG 33’ 20.16” and longitude West 139 DEG 50’ 40.69”;

THENCE on a bearing of South 45 DEG 45’ 50” West, a distance of 5 nautical miles 

to Corner No. 1, latitude North 59 DEG 29’ 16” and longitude West 139 DEG 56’ 12”, 

the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING for the area to be described;

THENCE described by the following series of coordinates connected by geodesic lines;

Corner No. 2: North 59 DEG 29’ 16” West 140 DEG 16’ 12”

Corner No. 3: North 59 DEG 09’ 16” West 140 DEG 16’ 12”

Corner No. 4: North 59 DEG 09’ 16” West 139 DEG 56’ 12”

THENCE to Corner No. 1, the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;

Comprising an area of approximately 990 square nautical miles of water and 9 square 

nautical miles of land.

46 47
Clauses and Certification

SUBJECT TO the reservation for the Campbell Radio Communication Tower, located 

on North Seagull Island at latitude North 59 DEG 21’ 02” and longitude West 140 

DEG 21’ 09”. The 1 square nautical mile reservation is described by a buffer with a 

radius of 3,428 feet from the center of the tower. 

EXAMPLE 2 – Guano Rock Marine Managed Area

Preamble

The following is a description of the boundary of the Guano Rock Marine Managed 

Area (MMA), located in the Mitchell Islands in Southeastern Lakasa. The MMA 

lies in federal and state waters, adjacent to the City of Umbrella Harbor, State of 

Lakasa, within the Gulf of Purdue, North Pacific Ocean. The Guano Rock MMA is 

administered jointly by the U.S. Park and Refuge Administration and the State of 

Lakasa Department of Natural Resources, as authorized by Executive Order 10815 of 

June 19, 1996. The purpose of the Guano Rock MMA is to preserve and protect the 

historic and cultural resources of Guano Rock and its surrounding waters, including 

the wreck of the SS Bass. The MMA includes Guano Rock, the water column, and 

underlying seabed including Esch Bank. The base map used to delimit this boundary 

is the 1:40,000-scale National Charting Agency (NCA) nautical chart 17125 entitled 

“Guano Rock”, 2nd Edition, dated October 1994. 

The boundary of the Guano Rock MMA is more particularly described in coordinates 

referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83) as follows: 

Body

COMMENCING AT a cast iron pipe located at the witness corner to the meander 

corner of Sections 6 and 7, of Township 66 South, Range 25 East of the Smith 

Meridian, State of Lakasa; 

THENCE due west with the section line along the line of latitude North 59 DEG 24’ 

15” approximately 124 feet to the intersection of the ambulatory shoreline of the Gulf of 

Purdue at Mean High Water (MHW), the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of the 

area to be described; 

THENCE in a southeasterly direction following the MHW line to a point on the north 

bank of the Ash River within Section 35 of Township 66 South, Range 25 East of the 

Smith Meridian, State of Lakasa; 

THENCE along a line across two headlands at the mouth of the Ash River,* using the 

shortest distance from the north bank to the line of MHW on the south bank; 

THENCE continuing along the MHW line in a southeasterly direction to a point 

within Section 23 of Township 67 South, Range 26 East of the Smith Meridian, State 

of Lakasa, at the intersection of the line of latitude at North 59 DEG 09’ 16”; 

THENCE due west along the line of latitude at North 59 DEG 09’ 16” to the eastern 

boundary of the Seagull Islands MMA at longitude West 139 DEG 56’ 12”; 

THENCE due north with the eastern boundary of the Seagull Islands MMA to a point 

at the intersection of latitude North 59 DEG 24’ 15”;

THENCE due east to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; 

Comprising an area of approximately 100 square nautical miles of water and 2 square 

nautical miles of land. 

Clauses and Certification 

SUBJECT TO the reservation for the Naito Native Corporation for subsistence 

activities at the mouth of the Ash River. The members of the Naito Native Corporation 

are allowed to harvest fish within the Guano Rocks MMA within a rectangular-shaped 

area extending 1 nautical mile seaward from a point 1 nautical mile northerly of the 

north bank of the Ash River and from a point 1 nautical mile southerly of the south 

bank of the Ash River. 

* The agency creating the boundary must determine the procedure it will use to close a river 

mouth, creek, or small bay. Whatever mapping procedure an agency uses, it must consistently 

apply that procedure to every instance.

48 49
Appendix B:

Primer on Marine Boundaries

Submerged Lands Act Line – This line is also referred to as the state seaward boundary. 

The Submerged Lands Act of 1953 (title 43, U.S. Code, section 1301) grants most 

coastal states rights out to 3 nautical miles (9 nautical miles for Texas and the Gulf 

coast of Florida, as well as Puerto Rico). Submerged Lands Act boundaries between 

states and the U.S. are ambulatory unless they are fixed by a deliberate action of the 

U.S. Supreme Court, that is, by a decree “fixing” the boundary by coordinates. 

Revenue Sharing Line – This line, also referred to as the Limit of ’8(g) Zone,’ extends 

3 nautical miles beyond the state seaward boundary, or the Submerged Lands Act 

line. Revenues generated from resources such as oil and gas within this area are shared 

between the federal government and the coastal state. Any Limit of ’8(g) Zone’ line 

based on a fixed Submerged Lands Act line is by default also fixed. Note that the 

Submerged Lands Act and Limit of ’8(g) Zone’ lines are unique to the U.S. In most 

other countries, offshore territory is controlled by the federal government.

Territorial Sea – The territorial sea, previously at 3 nautical miles, was extended to 12 

nautical miles from the U.S. baseline by Presidential Proclamation 5928 in 1988, in 

accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). 

The U.S. claims sovereignty in this area from the airspace down through the water 

column and into the subsoil.

Contiguous Zone – Established by Presidential Proclamation 7219 in 1999, this 

area, which extends offshore in the area between 12 and 24 nautical miles from the 

U.S. baseline, grants the U.S. the “control necessary to prevent infringement of its 

customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws, and regulations within its territory or 

territorial sea.”

Exclusive Economic Zone – Presidential Proclamation 5030 created the 200-nauticalmile exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in 1983. The EEZ of the U.S. is an area beyond 

and adjacent to the territorial sea of the U.S., or, for purposes of domestic fisheries laws, 

extending from the state seaward boundary. Within the EEZ, the U.S. has (a) sovereign 

rights for the purpose of exploring, exploiting, conserving, and managing natural 

resources, whether living and nonliving, of the seabed and subsoil and the superjacent 

waters, and with regard to other activities for the economic exploitation and exploration 

of the zone, such as the production of energy from the water, currents, and winds; (b) 

jurisdiction as provided for in international law with regard to the establishment and 

use of artificial islands, installations and structures, marine scientific research, and the 

protection and preservation of the marine environment, and (c) other rights and duties 

provided for under international law.

Continental Shelf – Under international law, the Continental Shelf is defined to include 

the seabed and subsoil beyond the continental margin out to a distance of 200 nautical 

miles from the baseline.

Note: The territorial sea, contiguous zone, and EEZ are measured from baseline points, 

which are established along the mean lower low water (MLLW) line and may include 

offshore rocks and islands. Part II, Article 5, of UNCLOS states that the baseline 

for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea is the low-water line along the coast as 

marked on officially recognized, large-scale nautical charts. The term low water does 

not reference a specific tidal datum; however, the lowest charted datum in the U.S. is 

MLLW, and that is the tidal datum of reference for the baseline. The Submerged Lands 

Act and revenue sharing lines are also measured from the baseline as described under 

Article 5 of UNCLOS; however, some U.S. domestic policy exceptions may apply when 

defining the coastline under the Submerged Lands Act. 

Also important is the fact that, with erosion and accretion, the coastline can move. 

When that happens, the baseline and associated boundaries will all move with it. 

Maritime boundaries established through treaties with neighboring foreign States 

are permanent and will not be affected by any change in the baseline. Finally, all these 

boundaries are in nautical miles. Other offshore boundaries include those for national 

parks, marine sanctuaries, and so on.

Other Domestic Marine Boundaries

NOAA Three Nautical Mile Line – The three nautical mile line, previously 

identified as the outer limit of the territorial sea, is retained on NOAA’s nautical 

charts because it continues to depict the jurisdictional limit of certain state and 

federal laws.

NOAA National Marine Sanctuary – The purpose of the Marine Protection, 

Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 was to prevent “unregulated dumping 

of material into the oceans, coastal, and other waters” that endanger “human 

health, welfare, and amenities, and the marine environment, ecological systems 

and economic potentialities.” Within this law, the transportation and dumping 

of radioactive, chemical, or biological substances were forbidden. Title III of this 

act, later called the National Marine Sanctuaries Act (title 16, U.S. Code, sections 

1431 and following), charged the secretary of commerce to identify, designate, and 

manage marine sites for their conservational, ecological, recreational, historical, 

aesthetic, scientific, or educational value within significant national ocean and 

Great Lake waters. The NOAA National Marine Sanctuary Program is the agency 

of responsibility for establishing sanctuary boundaries. Boundary developers 

should obtain official boundary coordinates and associated information from the 

sanctuary program.

50 51
Marine Protected Areas – Marine protected areas differ in location and jurisdiction. 

Some are in federal waters only and are managed under federal laws by federal 

agencies. Some are found only in state waters where both state and federal laws 

may apply. Marine protected areas may overlap other areas and share jurisdiction 

over some ocean waters. Finally, some marine protected areas include both marine 

and land areas. NOAA, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service are currently the agencies of responsibility for marine protected areas. 

Boundary developers should obtain official boundary coordinates and associated 

information from the appropriate agency of responsibility.

Fish and Wildlife Refuges – There are over 540 National Wildlife Refuges in the 

U.S. These areas are managed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 

for the continuing protection and conservation of fish and wildlife. One-hundredsixty-nine of these national wildlife refuges have a boundary that includes a marine 

component. That is, the refuge boundary, or a portion of the boundary, comes into 

contact with saltwater (or waters of the Great Lakes). The list of 169 refuges, which 

make up the initial MPA Inventory for USFWS, includes refuge boundaries that 

follow the coastline of the mainland or an offshore island, or the shoreline of a 

river that is tidally influenced. The list also includes refuge boundaries that extend 

offshore to include waters and possibly submerged lands. These offshore boundaries 

may follow Public Land Survey System township and range lines (e.g., Key West 

National Wildlife Refuge, Florida), unknown tidal datums such as “extreme low 

water” (e.g., Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska), or the 12-nautical-mile 

limit of the territorial sea (e.g., Navassa Island National Wildlife Refuge in the 

Caribbean Sea).

National Park Service Designations – Several of the 390 units managed by the 

National Park Service (NPS) have marine components. Glacier Bay National Park 

has both marine submerged lands and lands above mean high water on all islands 

out to a distance of 3 miles from the coastline. This National Park designated 

area offers the full resource protection of a traditional park. National Preserves

are established primarily for the protection of certain resources. Activities such as 

hunting, fishing, or the extraction of minerals and fuels may be permitted if they 

do not jeopardize the natural values. National Reserves are similar to preserves, 

although management may be transferred to local or state authorities. National 

Lakeshores and National Seashores focus on the preservation of natural values 

while at the same time providing water-oriented recreation. Additionally, National 

Recreation Areas encompass land and waters set aside for recreational use by acts 

of Congress. National Monuments like Fort Sumter, National Historical Parks like 

Salt River Bay, and National Memorials like the USS Arizona are a few samples of 

NPS commemorative site designations that often contain marine components.

Other – Offshore are many other types of boundaries—for example, military 

disposal areas, restricted areas, no discharge areas, and prohibited areas. Boundary 

developers should obtain official boundary coordinates and associated information 

for these and other boundaries from the appropriate agency of responsibility.

Appendix C:

Boundary Line Types

Because straight lines can be defined in many different ways, this appendix describes 

some of the more commonly used line types. When a non-projected boundary is 

described by coordinates, the boundary developer should clearly state the type of line 

connecting the turning points.

Geodesic (Geodetic) Line – ”A geodesic line is the shortest distance between any two 

points on a mathematically defined surface” (U.S. Department of Defense 1981). A 

geodesic line on an ellipsoid surface is a great circle on a sphere. When drawn on a 

rectangular latitude and longitude grid, a geodesic line appears to be a curve.

Great Circle Line – “A circle on the surface of the Earth, the plane of which passes 

through the center of the Earth” (U.S. Department of Defense 1981). “A great circle 

arc and a geodesic [line] are similar and the difference between them, depending on 

chart scale, may not be discernible. . . . The difference will depend on the length of 

the boundary segment and the latitude” (Smith 1982).

Small Circle Line – A circle on the surface of the earth, the plane of which does not 

pass through the earth’s center (Smith 1982).

Rhumb Line – A rhumb line is a line on the Earth’s surface that cuts all meridians at 

the same angle. A rhumb line is a straight line on a Mercator projection and a curved 

line on all other projections. Rhumb lines are also referred to as loxodromes. These 

lines represent a line of constant bearing. (Most NOAA nautical charts are on the 

Mercator projection.)

Figure 8. Rhumb Line Connecting Miami with San Francisco. The map on the left shows 

a rhumb line in a Mercator projection (straight line), while the map on the right shows this 

same line on an unprojected geodesic model of the Earth (curved line).

Apparent Straight Line – Depending on the map or chart projection and scale used to 

depict a boundary line, the line may appear to be a straight line. If a legal description 

or metadata record does not clearly state the type of line connecting turning points, 

the user should not make an assumption as to the type of line. Boundary developers 

should contact the agency of responsibility for the correct information.

52 53
Azimuth and Bearing – The bearing of a line is the angle of the line measured from 

a north or south reference meridian, to the east or west. It is always 90° or less, and 

includes letters to indicate the quadrant and reference meridian orientation. The 

azimuth of a line is the angle measured clockwise from a reference meridian and 

ranges from 0° to 360.° Azimuths are measured from either true or magnetic north, 

but true is preferable, since magnetic north changes with time. See examples in 

Table 8 below.

 Table 8. Relationship of Bearings and Azimuths

Bearing Azimuth

N45°00’E 45°00’

S56°43’E 123°17’

N47°25’W 312°35’

Appendix D:

Checklist for Writing a Boundary Description

The information below derives from a checklist for creating land-based legal 

descriptions. Boundary developers can apply many of these same principles to 

the marine environment, as this manual explains in Step 2, “Describe the Marine 

Boundary,” and illustrates in Appendix A, “Examples – Marine Managed Area Legal 

Descriptions.” Boundary developers should use this section as a compendium for 

writing an MMA description.

Writing the Description: General Guidelines

 The information should be presented for easy verification  Use a colon to end the preamble  Begin each course or set of coordinates on a new line of text  Underline, boldface, capitalize, or italicize important aspects of the 

description (such as Point of Beginning or Thence)

 Use a semicolon to end each course or set of coordinates

 Writing style should be consistent and clear  Avoid unnecessary capitalization

	Do not capitalize adjectives describing a line 

(e.g., southwesterly along the line of mean high tide)

	Do not capitalize general directional calls

 Do not use abbreviations (e.g., use north instead of N; feet instead of ft.)

Writing the Preamble of the Boundary Description

 Name of the unit or area

 Agency of jurisdiction

 Location information for unit or area  State, territory, or possession  County, borough, or parish  District, municipality, city, town, or village  Subdivision: name, number, date, and place of recording  Legislative plat or map: law number, date, title, or other information 

necessary for identification

 Recorded document: book and page, where filed, date, title, and other 

identifying information

 Public Land Survey System: township, range, section, lot, aliquot 

part, date accepted

 Land grant: name, date, court case number, and other identifying 

information

 Chart or map: name, number, sheet number, date published

 Identification of adjacent landowners or administrators 

(senior and junior rights)

54 55
Writing the Body of the Boundary Description*

(* Please note that this section lists several approaches to boundary making, not all of which 

would necessarily be applicable for a specific area.)

 Point of commencement

 Point of beginning

 Physical monuments, found or set

 Natural monuments

 Directions

 Basis of bearing (astronomic north, magnetic north, assumed, grid)

 All bearings on same basis

 Directional calls along a monument (e.g., southerly along shoreline)

 Directional calls along geometric or irregular lines 

(e.g., westerly with the 100-fathom contour)

 Bearings: correct quadrant 

(northeast, southeast, southwest, northwest)

 Azimuth: definition of reference meridian (south or north)

 Grid: definition of reference meridian

 Distance: consistent units and definition of units where necessary

 Curves: adequate information supplied

 Curves are considered tangent unless otherwise stated

 At least two parameters to a horizontal curve

	Tangent distance

	Radius

	Chord distance

	Arc distance

	Deflection angle

	Delta angle

	Degree of curvature (arc or chord)

 Direction of curvature (a curve can have adequate parameters to 

describe it, but the direction it bends or arcs may still be unknown)

	Direction of curvature

	Direction of radius at point of intersection or point of 

tangency

	Deflection: left or right

	Curves: tangent or not

 Coordinates: adequate information

 Geographic position (latitude/longitude)

 Plane coordinates (X and Y)

 Procedure used to determine coordinates

 Control used to determine coordinates

 Datum used for coordinates

 State Plane / UTM coordinates

	Reductions applied (convergency, scale, elevation factors)

	Datum (e.g., North American Datum of 1927 or 1983, etc.)

	Reference to system used (zone, state, local, city, 

or project datum)

 Mathematics

 Units

 All bearings and distances on same reference system, and figure 

should close mathematically

 Consistency of parts (length of arc, central angle, radius, etc.)

 All coordinates on same reference system

 All lines and parts defined by consistent dimensions 

 Consistency of significant figures

 Tidal datum

 Mean high water

 Mean higher high water

 Mean low water

 Mean lower low water

 Area

 Units (acres or hectares)

 Land component

 Water component

Writing the Clauses and Certification

 Clauses

 Limiting clauses (all easements)

 Augmenting clauses

 Certification of description

 Author, title

 Agency, date

56 57
Development Approaches

There are several approaches or methods for developing a marine boundary 

description. Because of the many features that marine boundaries reference, 

marine boundary descriptions are often a combination of the traditional 

surveying methods.

Metes and Bounds – Metes and bounds is a method of describing parcels by 

measure of length (metes) of the boundary lines (bounds). The most common 

method is to recite direction and length of each line, as if walking around the 

perimeter of the parcel being described. In general, the “metes” and “bounds” can 

be recited by reference to record, natural, or artificial monuments at the corners; 

and record, natural, or cultural boundary lines.

A true metes and bounds description contains information on the vicinity in which 

the parcel lies; a call for all ties and monuments, either record or physical, that 

determine the boundaries; all references to adjoining lands by name and record; 

and a full dimensional recital of the boundary courses, which close mathematically, 

in succession around the boundary.

Public Land Survey System (PLSS)– This system refers to a method of describing 

the rectangular system of surveys inaugurated by the Continental Congress on 

May 20, 1785, for the survey of the public lands of the U.S. In rectangular surveys, 

parcels are divided by a baseline intersected at right angles by a principal meridian. 

The intersection is the initial point from which the partitions are subdivided into 

equal size townships containing 36 sections. Generally, these parcels are described 

by reference to a township plat of the public land survey, containing reference to 

section, township, range, meridian, and state: for example, Section 20, Township 

40 North, Range 5 East of the 4th Principal Meridian, Wisconsin.

Bounds – A bounds description uses specific terms to reference the adjoining or 

bounded parcels, such as, “That parcel of land bounded on the North by Lake 

Superior, on the West by the Brule River, on the East by Ontonagon Creek.” It is 

also called a description by recital, since it is based upon recorded information or 

documents of official character and shown on plat maps or charts filed in a public 

office of record.

This type of description is effective when a survey cannot be performed, but 

boundary developers should clearly identify the intent of the description so the 

boundary can be accurately located in the future.

Appendix E:

Reference Section

Works Cited 

Bernstein, B., S. Iudicello, and C. Stringer. 2004. Lessons Learned from Recent Marine 

Protected Area Designations in the United States: A Report to the National Marine 

Protected Areas Center NOAA. National Fisheries Conservation Center: Ojai, CA. 

Accessed June 2006 at www.mpa.gov/information_tools/pdf/LessonsLearnedReport.pdf.

Berry, J.K. 1993. Beyond Mapping: Concepts, Algorithms, and Issues in GIS. GIS World 

Inc.: Fort Collins, CO.

Brody, S.D., D.R. Godschalk, and R.J. Burby. 2003. “Mandating Citizen Participation 

in Plan Making: Six Strategic Planning Choices.” Journal of the American Planning 

Association. Volume 69, Number 3. Pages 245 to 264.

Coastal States Organization (CSO). 1997. Putting the Public Trust Doctrine to Work: 

The Application of the Public Trust Doctrine to the Management of Lands, Waters and 

Living Resources of the Coastal States. Second edition. Coastal States Organization: 

Washington, D.C.

Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), Inc. 2001. ESRI Press Dictionary of 

GIS Terminology. Edited by K. Heather Kennedy. ESRI Press: Redlands, CA. 

Kelleher, G., and R. Kenchington. 1992. Guidelines for Establishing Marine Protected 

Areas: A Marine Conservation and Development Report. World Conservation Union 

(IUCN): Gland, Switzerland.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center. 

U.S. Department of Commerce. 2002. Marine Protected Areas Needs Assessment Final 

Report. In cooperation with the NOAA National Marine Protected Areas Center. 

NOAA Coastal Services Center: Charleston, SC. Accessed June 2006 at www.csc.noaa.

gov/mpa/MPANAFINAL.pdf.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine 

Protected Areas (MPA) Center. U.S. Department of Commerce. 2003. Marine 

Protected Area (MPA) Process Review: Case Studies of Five MPA Establishment Processes.

In cooperation with the NOAA Coastal Services Center. Accessed June 2006 at www.

mpa.gov/information_tools/pdf/mpalessons-learned.pdf. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine 

Protected Areas (MPA) Center. U.S. Department of Commerce. 2004. Stakeholder 

Participation: A Synthesis of Current Literature. In cooperation with the NOAA Coastal 

Services Center. Accessed June 2006 at www.mpa.gov/virtual_library/Publications/

Stakeholder_Synthesis.pdf.

58 59
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Marine 

Protected Areas (MPA) Center. U.S. Department of Commerce. 2005. Enforcing 

U.S. Marine Protected Areas: Synthesis Report. In cooperation with the NOAA Coastal 

Services Center. Accessed June 2006 at www.csc.noaa.gov/mpa/enforcement.pdf.

Shalowitz, Aaron L. 1962. Shore and Sea Boundaries, Volume One: Boundary Problems 

Associated with the Submerged Lands Cases and the Submerged Lands Acts. U.S. 

Department of Commerce, Coast and Geodetic Survey. Washington: U.S. Government 

Printing Office. Accessed June 2006 at http://chartmaker.ncd.noaa.gov/hsd/shallow.htm.

Smith, Robert W. 1982. “A Geographical Primer to Maritime Boundary Making.” 

Ocean Development and International Law Journal. Volume 12.

Thormahlen, L.F., P.H. Rogers, and A.J. Doughty. 2004. “Developing A Multipurpose 

Marine Cadastre for the United States Department of the Interior Minerals 

Management Service.” University of New Brunswick International Federation of 

Surveyors (FIG) Meeting on Marine Cadastre Issues.

U.S. Department of Defense. 1981. Glossary of Mapping, Charting, and Geodetic Terms. 

Fourth Edition. Defense Mapping Agency: Washington, DC.

Additional Resources

Reference Materials

Dobrzynski, T., and E. Nicholson. 2001. “An Evaluation of the Short-Term Social and 

Economic Impacts of Marine Reserves on User Groups in Key West.” Duke University 

Master’s Thesis.

Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Marine Boundary Working Group. 

“Marine Boundary Bibliography.” On-line. Bibliography of publications pertaining to 

technical and legal aspects of marine boundary delimitation. Site also contains posters, 

diagrams, and presentations. Accessed June 2006 at www.csc.noaa.gov/mbwg/htm/

outreach.htm.

International Hydrographic Organization. 1993. A Manual on Technical Aspects of the 

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Third Edition. Special Publication 51. 

International Hydrographic Bureau, Monaco.

Reed, Michael W. 2000. Shore and Sea Boundaries, Volume Three: The Development 

of International Maritime Boundary Principles through United States Practice. U.S. 

Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 

Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office. Accessed June 2006 at http://

chartmaker.ncd.noaa.gov/hsd/shallow.htm.

Shalowitz, Aaron L. 1964. Shore and Sea Boundaries, Volume Two: Interpretation and 

Use of Coast and Geodetic Survey Data. U.S. Department of Commerce, Coast and 

Geodetic Survey. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office. Accessed June 2006 

at http://chartmaker.ncd.noaa.gov/hsd/shallow.htm.

Thormahlen, L.F., P.H. Rogers, and A.J. Doughty. 2003. “Developing a Multipurpose 

Marine Cadastre from a Natural Resource Management Perspective—A Practical 

Solution.” University of New Brunswick International Federation of Surveyors (FIG) 

Meeting on Marine Cadastre Issues.

United Nations. 1982. The Law of the Sea – United Nations Convention on the Law 

of the Sea. United Nations: New York. Accessed June 2006 at www.un.org/Depts/los/

convention_agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm.

United Nations. 1989. The Law of the Sea – Definition of the Continental Shelf. United 

Nations: New York. 

United Nations. 1989. The Law of the Sea – Baselines: An Examination of the Relevant 

Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. United Nations: 

New York. Accessed June 2006 at www.un.org/Depts/los/doalos_publications/doalos_

publications.htm.

60 61
Technical Papers

Ball, W.E. 1992. “Geometric Median Line Computations.” U.S. Department of the 

Interior, Minerals Management Service. Accessed June 2006 at www.mms.gov/ld/pdfs/

GeometricMedianLine92.PDF. 

Ball, W.E. 1992. “Planar Median (Equidistant) Line Computations for Narrow 

Channels.” U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. Accessed 

June 2006 at http://www.mms.gov/ld/pdfs/Equidistant92.PDF.

Ball, W.E. 1999. “Three-Dimensional Coastline Projection Computational Techniques 

for Determining the Locations of Offshore Boundaries.” U.S. Department of the 

Interior, Minerals Management Service. OCS Report, MMS-99-0044. Accessed June 

2006 at www.mms.gov/itd/pubs/1999/99-0044.pdf.

Ball, W.E. 1999. “Three-Dimensional Equidistant Line Computational Techniques for 

Determining the Location of Offshore Boundaries.” U.S. Department of the Interior, 

Minerals Management Service. OCS Report, MMS-99-0045. www.mms.gov/itd/

pubs/1999/99-0045.pdf.

Christensen, H.J. 2002. “A Fully Automated Sea Boundary Delineator.” FIG XXII 

International Congress, Washington, DC, April 19–26, 2002. Accessed June 2006 at 

www.fig.net/pub/fig_2002/Js12/JS12_christensen.pdf.

Johnson, R.E., and L.F. Thormahlen. 2002. “Underwater Parks: Three Case Studies, 

and a Primer on Marine Boundary Issues.” Applied Geography. Volume 19. Number 1. 

Pages 10 to 19. Accessed June 2006 at www.georgewright.org/191johnsonrobert.pdf.

Thormahlen, L.F. 1999. “Boundary Development on the Outer Continental Shelf.” 

U.S. Department of the Interior, Minerals Management Service. OCS Report, 

MMS-99-0006. Accessed June 2006 at www.mms.gov/itd/pubs/1999/99-0006.PDF.

U.S. Bureau of the Budget. 1947. “United States National Map Accuracy Standards.” 

Issued June 10, 1941; revised April 26, 1943; revised June 17, 1947. Accessed June 2006 

at http://rockyweb.cr.usgs.gov/nmpstds/nmas647.html.

U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) National Ocean Service (NOS) Center for Operational Oceanographic 

Products and Services (CO-OPS). 2001. Tidal Datums and Their Applications. NOAA 

Special Publication NOS CO-OPS 1. NOAA CO-OPS: Silver Spring, MD. Accessed 

June 2006 at http://140.90.121.76/publications/tidal_datums_and_their_applications.pdf. 

Glossaries

Ellis, Fiona. 1999. GIS Self Learning Tool: Glossary. On-line. Web site hosted by the 

University of Melbourne, Department of Geomatics. Accessed June 2006 at www.sli.

unimelb.edu.au/gisweb/glossary.htm.

Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), Inc. 2001. ESRI Press Dictionary of 

GIS Terminology. Edited by K. Heather Kennedy. ESRI Press: Redlands, CA. 

International Hydrographic Organization (IHO). 1994. Hydrographic Dictionary. Fifth 

Edition. Special publication S-32. IHO: Monaco. Accessed June 2006 at www.iho.shom.

fr/publicat/nonfree/special/S-32-eng.pdf.

U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) National Ocean Service (NOS) Center for Operational Oceanographic 

Products and Services (CO-OPS). 2000. “Tide and Current Glossary.” NOAA COOPS: Silver Spring, MD. Accessed June 2006 at http://co-ops.nos.noaa.gov/publications/

glossary2.pdf.

U.S. Department of Defense. “Glossary of Real Estate Terms.” On-line. Accessed June 

2006 at www.nwp.usace.army.mil/re/gret.asp.

U.S. Department of the Interior. U.S. Geological Survey. “Shuttle Radar Topography 

Mission Glossary.” On-line. Accessed June 2006 at http://edc.usgs.gov/srtm/glossary.html.

U.S. Department of Labor. “Oil and Gas Well Drilling and Servicing eTool Glossary 

of Terms.” On-line. Abridged from “Dictionary of Petroleum Terms” by Petex and the 

University of Texas Austin. Accessed June 2006 at www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/oilandgas/

glossary_of_terms/glossary_of_terms_a.html.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. “Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment 

Glossary.” On-line. Accessed June 2006 at www.epa.gov/maia/html/glossary.html.

62 63
Appendix F:

Federal Data Sources

Code of Federal Regulations – The Code of Federal Regulations is an annual 

codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by 

the executive departments and agencies of the federal government. The Code of Federal 

Regulations is available in an electronic format and a traditional hard copy (book) format (www.gpoaccess.gov/cfr/).

As appropriate, all federal agencies must ensure that their official boundary 

coordinates or other associated boundary information is published in the 

Code of Federal Regulations.

Federal Register – The Federal Register is a legal document published every business 

day by the National Archives and Records Administration. It contains federal agency 

regulations; proposed rules and notices; and executive orders, proclamations, and 

other presidential documents. The Federal Register informs citizens of their rights and 

obligations and provides access to a wide range of federal benefits and opportunities 

for funding. The National Archives and Records Administration’s Office of the 

Federal Register prepares the Federal Register for publication in partnership with the 

Government Printing Office, which distributes it in paper, on microfiche, and on the 

World Wide Web (www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/).

All federal agencies must ensure that their official boundary coordinates and other 

appropriate marine cadastre information is published in the Federal Register.

Marine Protected Areas (MPA) Center– The MPA Web site provides details on 

the data being collected from federal, state, commonwealth, territory, tribal, and local 

sites as part of the marine managed areas (MMA) inventory. Several search features 

are available to help access the information contained in the inventory. Maps, 

downloadable features, and graphs and charts are available (www.mpa.gov and 

www.mpa.gov/inventory/inventory.html).

Minerals Management Service (MMS)– The MMS Offshore Leasing Program has a 

variety of GIS data and maps available by region (www.mms.gov/ld/Maps.htm).

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) – The NOAA 

Office of Coast Survey is responsible for producing the nation’s official nautical charts 

and depicting the maritime zones. In addition to nautical charts, in paper and digital 

formats, the Office of Coast Survey develops a suite of products that can be used in 

the development of marine boundaries. These data products include nautical charts, 

electronic navigational charts, the coastal map, extracted vector shoreline, territorial 

limits and boundaries, and other GIS products (www.nauticalcharts.noaa.gov).

United States Geological Survey (USGS) – USGS maps depict the coastal zone and 

nearshore areas. Under its current map revision policies, USGS relies on shoreline 

data from NOAA, “when it’s available.” USGS generally will not revise the shoreline 

depicted on its maps from aerial photography alone, unless 1) there are obvious manmade changes or 2) when the aerial photography was acquired at mean high water.

Most maps are also available in one or more digital formats. Two National 

Hydrography Dataset Standards (map scales of 1:100,000 and smaller and larger than 

1:100,000) are available on-line (http://rockyweb.cr.usgs.gov/nmpstds/nhdstds.html).

In digital form, USGS has available Digital Line Graphics (the line work in USGS 

topography maps), Digital Raster Graphics (pictures of actual USGS topography 

maps), and Digital Ortho Quads (aerial photos of sections of USGS maps). It is 

important to always check the metadata for source, scale, accuracy, and currentness of 

the geospatial data.

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) – The BLM Lands and Realty, and Cadastral

Survey Programs are responsible for 1) public land conveyance data of all past, current, 

and future right, title, and interest in real property; 2) federal land ownership status 

of all title, estate, or interest of the federal government in a parcel of real and mineral 

property, by the portrayal of title for all federal estates or interests in land; and 3) 

cadastral data describing the geographic extent of past, current, and future right, title, 

and interest in real property, and the framework to support the description of that 

geographic extent, which includes survey and land description parcel by parcel. The 

title and boundary data are documents and survey plats in paper and digital formats. 

Information and data on ownership and boundaries of federal interest lands 

is available on the GeoCommunicator home page (www.geocommunicator.gov).

Specific title or boundary information and data are available on the BLM home

page by selecting the state office of interest (www.blm.gov/nhp/index.htm).

National Park Service (NPS) – The National Park Service provides boundary data for 

all the national Parks (www.nps.gov/gis/).

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) – USFWS provides boundary 

data and related geospatial data for all of its refuges (www.fws.gov/data/datafws.html).

64 65
Appendix G:

Acronyms

AVIRIS Airborne Visible and Infrared Imaging Spectrometer

BLM Bureau of Land Management 

 (U.S. Department of the Interior)

CEQ Council on Environmental Quality

CGTP Cartographic and Geospatial Technology 

 Programs (NOAA)

CO-OPS Center for Operational Oceanographic 

 Products and Services (NOAA)

CSDGM Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata

CSO Coastal States Organization

DD decimal degrees

DMS degrees minutes seconds

DOI Department of the Interior

ECS electronic charting systems

EEZ exclusive economic zone

ENC Electronic Navigational Chart (from NOAA)

ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute

FCC Federal Communications Commission

FGDC Federal Geographic Data Committee

FMRI Florida Marine Research Institute

GEODAS Geophysical Data System (NOAA)

GIS geographic information system

GNIS Geographic Names Information System (USGS)

GNS GEOnet Names Server

GOS Geospatial One-Stop

GPS Global Positioning System

IHO International Hydrographic Organization

ITRF International Terrestrial Reference Frame

LOS Law of the Sea

MHHW mean higher high water

MHW mean high water

MLLW mean lower low water

MLW mean low water

MMA marine managed area

MMS Minerals Management Service 

 (U.S. Department of the Interior)

MPA marine protected area

NAD North American Datum

NAVD North American Vertical Datum

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NESDIS National Environmental Satellite, Data, 

 and Information Service (NOAA)

NGDC National Geophysical Data Center (NOAA)

NGO nongovernmental organization

NGVD National Geodetic Vertical Datum

NHAP National High Altitude Photography

nmi nautical mile (also NM, and nm)

NMS National Marine Sanctuary

NMSA National Marine Sanctuaries Act

NMSP National Marine Sanctuary Program

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

 (U.S. Department of Commerce)

NOS National Ocean Service (NOAA)

NPS National Park Service (U.S. Department of the Interior)

NSDI National Spatial Data Infrastructure

NSGIC National States Geographic Information Council 

OCS Office of Coast Survey (NOAA)

OCSLA Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act

OGC Office of General Counsel (NOAA)

PDF portable document format

PLSS Public Land Survey System

QA/QC quality assurance and quality control

SLA Submerged Lands Act

SPCS State Plane Coordinate System

UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

USAEC U.S. Army Environmental Center

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

 (U.S. Department of the Interior)

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

 (U.S. Department of the Interior)

UTM Universal Transverse Mercator

WGS World Geodetic System

2234 South Hobson Avenue

Charleston, SC 29405-2413

(843) 740-1200

www.csc.noaa.gov

66