APPENDIX 1: CONVERSION TABLES Metric to English Units—Equivalents of Length 1 micron (␮) ϭ 0.001 millimeter (mm) ϭ 0.00004 inch (in.) 1 mm ϭ 0.1 centimeter (cm) ϭ 0.03937 in. 1000 mm ϭ 100 cm ϭ 1 meter (m) ϭ 39.37 in. ϭ 3.2808 feet (ft) 1mϭ 0.001 kilometer (km) ϭ 1.0936 yard (yd) 1000 m ϭ 1 km ϭ 0.62137 mile (mi) 12 in. ϭ 1 ft ϭ 0.3048 m 1 cm ϭ 0.39370 in. ϭ 0.032808 ft 1kmϭ 105 cm ϭ 0.62137 mi 1 fathom ϭ 6 ft ϭ 1.8288 m 1 nautical mile ϭ 1.85325 km 1 in. ϭ 2.54001 cm 1 ft ϭ 30.480 cm 1 statute mile ϭ 1.60935 km ϭ 5280 ft 1 astronomical unit ϭ 1.496 ϫ 108 km ϭ 92,957,000 mi 1 light year ϭ 9.460 ϫ 1012 km ϭ 5.878 ϫ 1012 mi 1 parsec ϭ 3.085 ϫ 1013 km ϭ 1.917 ϫ 1013 mi Square Measures 1 square foot ϭ 0.00002295684 acre ϭ 929.0 cm2 1 acre ϭ 43,560 ft2 ϭ 0.0015625 mi2 1 yd2 ϭ 0.836127 m2 1 hectare ϭ 2.471054 acre 1mi2 (statute) ϭ 640 acres ϭ 2.5900 km2 1 cm2 ϭ 0.1550 in.2 ϭ 0.0010764 ft2 1 km2 ϭ 1010 cm2 ϭ 0.3861 mi2 1mm2 ϭ 0.00155 in.2 1 in.2 ϭ 6.452 cm2 1 m2 ϭ 10.764 ft2 1 ft2 ϭ 0.09290 m2 1km2 ϭ 0.3861 mi2 1mi2 ϭ 2.5900 km2 1088 CONVERSION TABLES Cubic Measures 1 gal (UK) ϭ 4.5461 liters ϭ 1.200956 gal (US) 1 liter ϭ 0.219969 gal (UK) ϭ 0.264173 gal (US) 1 gal (US) ϭ 3.7854 liters ϭ 0.832670 gal (UK) 1 cc ϭ 0.0610 cu. in. ϭ 0.000035314 cu. ft 1 cu in. ϭ 16.387 cc 1 cu ft ϭ 28317 cc 1mm3 ϭ 0.000061 in.3 1 in.3 ϭ 16.387 cm3 (cc) 1 cm3 (cc) ϭ 0.0610 in.3 1 ft3 ϭ 0.028317 m3 1m3 ϭ 35.315 ft3 1mi3 ϭ 4.1681 km3 1 km3 ϭ 0.239911 mi3 Statute Miles to Nautical Miles to Kilometers Statute Nautical Kilometers Statute Nautical Kilometers 1 /4 0.22 0.40 9 7.82 14.48 1 /2 0.43 0.80 10 8.68 16.10 3 /4 0.65 1.21 20 17.36 32.20 1 0.87 1.61 30 26.05 48.30 2 1.74 3.22 40 34.74 64.35 3 2.61 4.84 50 43.42 80.45 43.486.45 6052.10 96.55 5 4.35 8.05 70 61.00 113.00 6 5.22 9.65 80 69.60 129.00 7 6.08 11.27 90 78.16 145.00 8 6.96 12.90 100 87.00 161.00 Fathoms to Feet to Meters Fathoms Feet Meters Fathoms Feet Meters 1 /4 1.5 0.5 61/2 39.0 11.9 1 /2 3.00.9 63/4 40.5 12.3 3 /4 4.5 1.4 7 42.0 12.8 16.0 1.8 8 48.0 14.6 1 1 /4 7.5 2.3 9 54.0 16.5 1 1 /2 9.02.7 10 60.0 18.3 3 1 /4 10.53.21166.020.1 212.0 3.7 12 72.0 21.9 1 2 /4 13.54.1 1378.023.8 1 2 /2 15.0 4.6 14 84.0 25.6 3 2 /4 16.55.0 15 90.027.4 3 18.0 5.5 16 96.0 29.3 1 3 /4 19.55.9 17 102.031.1 1 3 /2 21.0 6.4 18 108.0 32.9 3 3 /4 22.5 6.9 19 114.034.7 424.07.3 20 120.036.6 1 4 /4 25.5 7.8 30 180.0 54.9 1 4 /2 27.0 8.2 40 240.073.2 3 4 /4 28.5 8.7 50 300.0 91.4 530.0 9.1 60360.0 109.7 1 5 /4 31.5 9.6 70 420.0 128.0 1 5 /2 33.0 10.1 80480.0 146.3 3 5 /4 34.5 10.5 90 540.0 164.6 6 36.0 11.0 100 600.0 182.9 1 6 /4 37.511.4 APPENDIX 2: JOURNALS Professional journals, periodicals, gazetteers, government publications, and subscribe to hard copies of journals because they rely on a central source trade magazines are a primary means of communicating information for interlibrary loan or use electronic services to order requested papers. among coastal scientists. These information sources are usually provided to This is an increasingly electronic age where much research is conducted in users as hard copy on paper stock, but there is an increasing trend toward front of a computer screen. dual publication with electronic versions becoming more widely available. There are pros and cons in these new venues for dissemination of Consideration of the topic in terms of content, availability, and cost is, information related to coastal research. There are many physical and psy- however, not as simple as it might first appear. There have been many recent chological disadvantages to spending long hours in front of computer changes in the media of communication. Most senior researchers are famil- screens. Back radiation from monitors, eyestrain, carpal tunnel syndrome, iar with paper copy volumes that were searched via perusal of tables of con- and lack of physical exercise are but a few of the drawbacks. Positive tents in various research publications (e.g., Current Contents) or by tracking aspects focus on access to vast amounts of information not heretofore pos- down references cited in research papers. Prior to the last decade, journals sible to the average person. But, again there are pros and cons to the flood were generally inexpensive enough for most professionals to subscribe on of data offered by computer searches. Search results require much sifting a personal basis. Many researchers built up a personal research library of data for relevancy and computer searchers often miss critical, non- comprised by books and journals, the latter supplying the most recent cut- mainline sources of information. It is a trade-off, computer searchers ver- ting edge information. These private libraries were often conveniently sus perusal of personal hard copies or visits to the stacks in libraries. located at a university or home office. Notes kept on index cards or book- Journals, the basic resource for armchair research, cover all aspects of marks often signaled important articles or passages in journals. The coastal coastal research but inclusion of all relevant or pertinent journals researcher was conversant with the literature and it often was mostly at becomes problematic depending on the definition of coastal research hand for immediate perusal in the office or research laboratory. (see Introduction; Management) and specific fields of interest. Even Sometimes professional organizations publish lists of citations in more basic is consideration ofwhat is “coastal” from a definitional specialized fields for specific time frames, as a means to facilitate or expe- point of view, at least as far as reporting research results is concerned. dite the compilation and perusal of the coastal literature. Examples Greater diffusivity of the concept of what constitutes a coastal topic include supplements to the Annotated Bibliography of Quaternary relates to viewpoints, perspectives, and orientation of study problems. Shorelines published by the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia The focus or content of journals is relatively clear-cut for the basic (e.g., Special Publication No. 6, 1965; Special Publication No., 10, 1970; sciences (e.g., biology, geology) but becomes blurred in applications Special Publication No. 11, 1974), GeoAbstracts (East Anglia, UK) (Third (e.g., coastal engineering, ecology, geophysics, geochemistry, geotech- Supplement, 1979),and Journal of Coastal Research (Fourth Supplement, nique, biogeochemistry,hydrophysics, hydrochemistry,hydrobiology, 1986). The International Bibliography of Coastal Geomorphology sedimentology, remote sensing), and extremely broad ranging in the (Sherman, 1992; Kelletat, 1996), published by the Journal of Coastal management subfields (e.g., coastal environments; marine pollution; Research and the International Geographical Union (Commission on use of maritime and marine resources; legal, political, social, and eco- Coastal Systems), is another example of efforts to summarize a great liter- nomic analyses). Although studies in the pure sciences (e.g., physics, ature of coastal research in comprehensive bibliographic lists for special- chemistry) can be very specific, coastal research is mostly conducted ized fields. Such efforts are noteworthy in themselves because they are not from the purview of some application or for greater understanding of common. When available in electronic format on a CD, for example, the coastal shape or configuration due to wave action (e.g., coastal mor- search capabilities are enormously increased and the research value of the phodynamics). The scope of coastal science is thus potentially vast and compendium is substantially increased over paper copy. the possibilities of research materials are almost limitless. As an exam- The convenience and familiarity of yesteryear is but a memory of the ple of the wide range of source materials for coastal research, Table past. Research procedures and access to information was changed forever A2.1 is the result of a partial and edited printout of holdings in the with the advent of the modern personal computer.