Hydrographic surveyors collect data for various purposes, e.g. for producing nautical charts. Most data are properly archived for future reference, while other data are just represented in a survey-report. Over the years surveyors and hydrographers have collected an enormous amount of data. We also know that modern survey equipment supply us with increasing amounts of data to process and store. The increasing use of remote sensing techniques will add even more to this task. However if all this data primarily exists in archived form, it is of little use for other purposes
This issue’s theme is: ‘Hydrography for Fishery’. It is among others the fisherman who can profit greatly from the availability of modern hydrographic survey data. An increasing number of large fishing vessels has very sophisticated equipment on board to help them to increase their catch capabilities. These systems need ‘environmental data’ (e.g., 3D-bottom bathymetry, temperature, salinity, phytoplankton layer information, etc). Quite a lot of data has been collected, but is it available to the fishing industry?
An example: Some systems developed for the fishing industry generate glossy looking 3D-bottom depth pictures that are based on depth figures/contours derived from nautical charts only. To give the fisherman real depth structure information, their systems need to be fed by the detailed depth data which resides in archives at a survey company or hydrographic office. Since this data is not always available, some of these systems build their own depth database from data collected when the vessel is fishing. However, this data is of limited accuracy when compared to survey data where necessary corrections have been performed such as tidal corrections, and sound velocity. The ‘fishing-systems’ take these corrections only in a primitive way into account.
The willingness of hydrographic offices to make this type of data available to other users is changing. For instance, during the cold war there was a drive to collect hydrographic and oceanographic data that then became classified. However, today military funding for this type of data collection has decreased, and ‘peace-dividend’ is being taken up. One indication of this is UKHO that is preparing to generate money from its (oceanographic) database (e.g., the co-operation between UKHO/Seafish with the ‘Fisherman Pilots’ as a result). There are some other initiatives as well (see. the EU: www.sea-search.net and the UK: www.oceannet.org ). These initiatives are an indication that we as surveyors/hydrographers are aware that we need to offer a broader range of Marine Information products and services, but also more ‘down to earth’ that government offices have to try to generate some money.
There is a saying: ‘data is worth gold’. But are the data owners motivated or willing to bring their data to the market? Furthermore, is the market willing to pay for the ‘gold’ (i.e. royalties)? I realise the difficulties of all the different data owners and bringing them together. However, we need to consider these as future opportunities.
Our July/August issue has an ‘As it Was’ article on an Antartic-expedition starting in 1902, see in relation to this www.vagabond.fr for an expedition 100 years later: a sailing yacht trying to navigate the NE-passage.