1. We determined that naturalness is the natural state of an area and naturalness is changed based on human activity.

2. We identified all the possible human activities and structures within the mid-Atlantic region that could potentially have an impact on the naturalness of an area.

3. As much data on the activities we identified, in the form of raster data sets and background literature, were obtained.

4. All data was accessed via the MARCO Data Portal or the Center for Remote Sensing and Spatial Analysis Server in junction with the MARCO team. The only exception being the location of dredge disposal, which was found on the EPA website as coordinates which were manually inputted into ArcMap and digitized.

5. All datasets were condensed into one file so that the information could be represented in the default MARCO grid. This file had an initial instance per grid cell for each field, which represented annual occurrences of each human activity.

6. Some of the files were initially vector datasets and had to be translated into raster format, then joined with the grid file to perform further operations.

7. Once all data was joined a frequency and intensity field were added for each activity type. From that we added a severity field and a final naturalness score.

7.1. The frequency was determined by normalizing the data given to us to a 0-1 scale. The frequency was initially in the form of a range of values. It is the range that was normalized.

7.2. The intensity was calculated based on Morgan, L. E., & Ratana, C. (2003). Shifting gears. The impact on the physical and biological structure were given a rating of 1-5. These values were utilized for our model and additional values were generated for other human activities based on our independant research.

7.2.1. The values were then summed together

7.2.2. After the values were summed, a pairwise comparison was performed, in order to assign a weight to each value.

7.2.3. The weight and rate were multiplied together to generate a weighted value of the activity.

7.2.4. The weighted values were then normalized to a scale of 0-1, which generated our final intensity value.

8. The frequency of each activity was multiplied to the intensity value associated with that activity. This generated our severity of human impact in a percentage form.

9. In order to calculate naturalness we subtracted 1 from the severity value.

10. The naturalness score is a percentage of potential naturalness, so values range from 0.0 to 1.0.

11. For each cell we used the lowest naturalness value for all the activities.

1. We determined that naturalness is the natural state of an area and naturalness is changed based on human activity.

2. We identified all the possible human activities and structures within the mid-Atlantic region that could potentially have an impact on the naturalness of an area.

3. As much data on the activities we identified, in the form of raster data sets and background literature, were obtained.

4. All data was accessed via the MARCO Data Portal or the Center for Remote Sensing and Spatial Analysis Server in junction with the MARCO team. The only exception being the location of dredge disposal, which was found on the EPA website as coordinates which were manually inputted into ArcMap and digitized.

5. All datasets were condensed into one file so that the information could be represented in the default MARCO grid. This file had an initial instance per grid cell for each field, which represented annual occurrences of each human activity.

6. Some of the files were initially vector datasets and had to be translated into raster format, then joined with the grid file to perform further operations.

7. Once all data was joined a frequency and intensity field were added for each activity type. From that we added a severity field and a final naturalness score.

7.1. The frequency was determined by normalizing the data given to us to a 0-1 scale. The frequency was initially in the form of a range of values. It is the range that was normalized.

7.2. The intensity was calculated based on Morgan, L. E., & Ratana, C. (2003). Shifting gears. The impact on the physical and biological structure were given a rating of 1-5. These values were utilized for our model and additional values were generated for other human activities based on our independant research.

7.2.1. The values were then summed together

7.2.2. After the values were summed, a pairwise comparison was performed, in order to assign a weight to each value.

7.2.3. The weight and rate were multiplied together to generate a weighted value of the activity.

7.2.4. The weighted values were then normalized to a scale of 0-1, which generated our final intensity value.

8. The frequency of each activity was multiplied to the intensity value associated with that activity. This generated our severity of human impact in a percentage form.

9. In order to calculate naturalness we subtracted 1 from the severity value.

10. The naturalness score is a percentage of potential naturalness, so values range from 0.0 to 1.0.

11. For each cell we used the lowest naturalness value for all the activities.