The water level data comes from the groundwater monitoring network of Nova Scotia (Canadian province). Each well in the observation network is equipped with a hydrostatic pressure transducer and a temperature sensor connected to a data logger. A second pressure transducer located above the water surface allows for adjusting the water level according to atmospheric pressure variations. The time series refers to the level below which the soil is saturated with water at the site and at the time indicated. The water level is expressed in meters above sea level (MASL). The dataset consists of a general description of the observation site including; the identifier, the name, the location, the elevation and a series of numerical values designating the water levels at a defined date and time of measurement.

In 2021, the Canada Coast Guard (CCG) and Fisheries and Oceans Canada updated its administrative boundaries following the creation a new Arctic region. There are now 4 administrative regions in CCG (Western, Arctic, Central and Atlantic). DFO and Coast Guard Arctic Regions developed these regions in partnership with the people they serve; this important decision will lead to stronger programs and services to better meet the unique needs of our Arctic communities. DFO and CCG operations and research cover Canada's land and waters to the international boundaries (EEZ) and are in no way limited to the boundaries drawn in the map.

The Quebec—Saint-Lawrence River dataset is part of Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Shoreline Classification and Pre-Spill database. Shoreline classification data has been developed for use by the Environmental Emergencies Program of Environment and Climate Change Canada for environmental protection purposes. Marine and freshwater shorelines are classified according to the character (substrate and form) of the upper intertidal (foreshore) or upper swash zone (Sergy, 2008). This is the area where oil from a spill usually becomes stranded and where the treatment or cleanup activities take place. The basic parameter that defines the shoreline type is the material that is present in the intertidal zone. The presence or absence of sediments is a key factor in determining whether oil is stranded on the surface of a substrate or can penetrate and/or be buried. This dataset contains thousands of linear shoreline segments ranging in length from 200 m and 2 km long. The entities represent the location of the segments and their geomorphological description. There exist further fields in the attribute table for this dataset. We are currently working on standardizing our shoreline segmentation datasets and the updated data will soon be uploaded to the catalog. Sergy, G. (2008). The Shoreline Classification Scheme for SCAT and Oil Spill Response in Canada. Proceedings of the 31stArctic and Marine Oil Spill Program Technical Seminar.Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON, Pp. 811-819.

Hunting districts as presented in the Compendium of Migratory Bird Hunting Regulations: Quebec https://www.canada.ca/fr/environnement-changement-climatique/services/chasse-oiseaux-migrateurs-gibier/reglementation-resumes-provinciaux-territoriaux/quebec.html These boundaries are presented for information purposes only and have no legal value.

These datasets show commercial fisheries catch weight landings of directed fisheries and bycatch from the Scotian Shelf, the Bay of Fundy, and Georges Bank from NAFO Divisions 4VWX and the Canadian portions of 5Y and 5Z. Atlantic Canadian inter-regional maps of four species (Atlantic Halibut, Bluefin Tuna, Redfish and Scallop) are also included from NAFO Divisions 4RST, 3KLMNOP, and 2GHJ. Five-year composite maps (2014–2018) that aggregate catches for each map series are publicly available. The maps aggregate catch weight (kg) per 10 km2 hexagon grid cell for selected species, species groupings and gear types to identify important fishing areas. These maps may be used for decision making in coastal and oceans management, including marine spatial planning, environmental emergency response operations and protocols, Marine Stewardship Council certification processes, marine protected area networks, and ecological risk assessment. These datasets have been filtered to comply with the Government of Canada's privacy policy. Privacy assessments were conducted to identify NAFO unit areas containing data with less than five vessel IDs, licence IDs or fisher IDs. If this threshold was not met, catch weight locations were withheld from these unit areas to protect the identity or activity of individual vessels or companies. Maps were created for the following species, species groupings and gear types: 1. Groundfish (all species) 2. Groundfish Bottom Trawl 3. Groundfish Gillnet 4. Groundfish Bottom Longline 5. Groundfish (quarterly composites Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4) 6. Atlantic Cod 7. Atlantic Cod, Haddock and Pollock 8. Flatfish 9. Atlantic Halibut 10. Greenland Halibut (Turbot) 11. Hagfish 12. Cusk 13. Dogfish 14. Redfish 15. Red Hake 16. Silver Hake 17. White Hake 18. Monkfish 19. Sculpin 20. Skate 21. Wolffish 22. Squid 23. Herring 24. Mackerel 25. Large Pelagics 26. Bluefin Tuna 27. Other Tuna 28. Swordfish 29. Porbeagle, Mako and Blue Shark 30. Snow Crab 31. Other Crab 32. Scallop 33. Scallop (quarterly composites Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4) 34. Offshore Clam 35. Shrimp 36. Offshore Lobster 37. Disputed Zone Area 38B Lobster 38. Whelk

This entry provides access to surficial geology maps that have been published by the Geological survey of Canada. Two series of maps are available: "A Series" maps, published from 1909 to 2010 and "Canadian Geoscience Maps", published since 2010. Three types of CGM-series maps are available: 1)Surficial Geology: based on expert-knowledge full air photo interpretation (may include interpretive satellite imagery, Digital Elevation Models (DEM)), incorporating field data and ground truthing resulting from extensive, systematic fieldwork across the entire map area. Air photo interpretation includes map unit/deposit genesis, texture, thickness, structure, morphology, depositional or erosional environment, ice flow or meltwater direction, age/cross-cutting relationships, landscape evolution and associated geological features, complemented by additional overlay modifiers, points and linear features, selected from over 275 different geological elements in the Surficial Data Model. Wherever possible, legacy data is also added to the map. 2)Reconnaissance Surficial Geology: based on expert-knowledge full air photo interpretation (may include interpretive satellite imagery, DEMs), with limited or no fieldwork. Air photo interpretation includes map unit/deposit genesis, texture, thickness, structure, morphology, depositional or erosional environment, ice flow or meltwater direction, age/cross-cutting relationships, landscape evolution and associated geological features, complemented by additional overlay modifiers, points and linear features, selected from over 275 different geological elements in the Surficial Data Model. Wherever possible, legacy data is also added to the map. 3)Predictive Surficial Geology: derived from one or more methods of remote predictive mapping (RPM) using different satellite imagery, spectral characteristics of vegetation and surface moisture, machine processing, algorithms etc., DEMs, where raster data are converted to vector, with some expert-knowledge air photo interpretation (training areas or post-verification areas), varying degrees of non-systematic fieldwork, and the addition of any legacy data available. Each map is based on a version of the Geological Survey of Canada's Surficial Data Model (https://doi.org/10.4095/315021), thus providing an easily accessible national surficial geological framework and context in a standardized format to all users. "A series" maps were introduced in 1909 and replaced by CGM maps in 2010. The symbols and vocabulary used on those maps was not as standardized as they are in the CGM maps. Some "A series" maps were converted into, or redone, as CGM maps, Both versions are available whenever that is the case. In addition to CGM and "A series" maps, some surficial geology maps are published in the Open File series. Those maps are not displayed in this entry, but can be found and accessed using the NRCan publications website, GEOSCAN:(https://geoscan.nrcan.gc.ca).

Three marine spatial planning areas are delineated in Eastern Canada to define the spatial extents of marine spatial plans being led by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO): the Estuary and Gulf of St. Lawrence (EGSL), the Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) Shelves, and the Scotian Shelf and Bay of Fundy. The EGSL planning area includes the St. Lawrence River estuary from northeast of Île d’Orléans, Quebec, the Saguenay River estuary, and the entire Gulf of St. Lawrence as far north as the Strait of Belle Isle (NAFO Divisions 4RST). The NL Shelves planning area includes areas off southern, eastern and northern Newfoundland, part of the Churchill River and Lake Melville, as well as off the Labrador coast to the extent of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) (NAFO Divisions 2GHJ and 3KLNOP). The Scotian Shelf and Bay of Fundy planning area includes DFO Maritimes’ administrative region off the Atlantic coast of Nova Scotia to the extent of the EEZ, the Bay of Fundy and the Canadian portion of the Gulf of Maine (NAFO Divisions 4VWX, 5Ze, and the Canadian portion of 5Y). The French EEZ for St. Pierre et Miquelon is excluded from the three planning areas. These planning areas are derived from Federal Marine Bioregions (https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/23eb8b56-dac8-4efc-be7c-b8fa11ba62e9) that were developed by a Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat process using ecosystem-based management principles to define 13 ecological bioregions that have informed but not directed DFO implementation of marine spatial planning.

In 2021, the Canada Coast Guard (CCG) and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) updated its administrative boundaries following the creation a new Arctic region.There are now 7 administrative regions in DFO (Pacific, Arctic, Ontario and Prairie, Quebec, Gulf, Maritimes, Newfoundland and Labrador). DFO and Coast Guard Arctic Regions developed these regions in partnership with the people they serve; this important decision will lead to stronger programs and services to better meet the unique needs of our Arctic communities.DFO and CCG operations and research cover Canada's land and waters to the international boundaries (EEZ) and are in no way limited to the boundaries drawn in the map.

Eelgrass (Zostera marina) is important to waterfowl such as Atlantic Brant (Branta bernicla hrota), Canada Goose (Branta canadensis), American Black Duck (Anas rubripes), Common Goldeneye (Bucephala clangula) and Barrow's Goldeneye (Bucephala islandica). In New Brunswick eelgrass can be found along the Gulf of St. Lawrence, in protected harbours. Within this dataset are the results of eelgrass land-cover classifications using either satellite or aerial photography for seven harbours: Bouctouche (46 30’N, 64 39’W); Miscou (47.90 N, -64.55 W); Neguac (47.25 N, -65.03 W); Richibucto (46.70 N, -64.80 W); Saint-Simon (47.77 N, -64.76 W); Tracadie (47.55 N, -64.88 W); and Cocagne (46.370 N, -64.600 W). Information on each dataset is provided: 1. Bouctouche This dataset contains results from an eelgrass classification for Bouctouche Bay, New Brunswick. True colour aerial photography at 57 centimetre resolution was collected on September 2, 2009 by Nortek Resources of Thorburn, Nova Scotia (http://www.nortekresources.com/). Image classification was conducted using eCognition Developer v. 8 Software, which first segments the image into spectrally similar units, which were then classified manually. Additionally, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (Gulf Region, Moncton, NB) conducted a visual field survey in the same field season at 688 sites. Two-thirds of these sites were used to assist in image classification, while the remainder were used to assess accuracy. Three classes were identified: i. Good Quality Eelgrass: relatively dense, clean, green blades with minimal epiphytes or algal growth. ii. Medium Quality Eelgrass: predominately green blades that may have some epiphyte or algal growth. These stands can be less or equally dense as Good Quality Eelgrass, but the best grasses are certainly not as abundant. iii. Eelgrass Absent/Poor Quality: eelgrass is absent, or if it is present it is typically covered with epiphytes or other algae or dying or dead. Eelgrass was classified correctly 83.7% of the time in a fuzzy accuracy assessment technique, whereby those classes that were ‘off’ by one class, e.g. Good Quality eelgrass classed as Medium Quality, were given half credit towards the overall accuracy. Of 187 sites that were within the classification area, 131 were correct, 51 were "one-off", and 5 were incorrect [(131 + (51/2))/ 187 = 0.837]. 2. Miscou True colour aerial photography at 57 centimetre resolution was collected on August 20th and 24th, 2009 by Nortek Resources of Thorburn, Nova Scotia (http://www.nortekresources.com/). Image classification was conducted using eCognition Developer v. 8 Software, which first segments the image into spectrally similar units, which were then classified manually. Additionally, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (Gulf Region, Moncton, NB) conducted a visual field survey in the same field season at 103 sites. From these sites 70% were used to assist in image classification, while the remainder were used to assess accuracy. Three classes were identified: i. Good Quality Eelgrass: relatively dense, clean, green blades with minimal epiphytes or algal growth. ii. Medium Quality Eelgrass: predominately green blades that may have some epiphyte or algal growth. These stands can be less or equally dense as Good Quality Eelgrass, but the best grasses are certainly not as abundant. iii. Eelgrass Absent/Poor Quality: eelgrass is absent, or if it is present it is typically covered with epiphytes or other algae or dying or dead. Eelgrass was classified correctly 96.7% of the time (30/31 = 0.967). 3. Neguac This dataset contains results from an eelgrass classification for Neguac Bay, New Brunswick. True colour aerial photography at 57 centimetre resolution was collected on September 2, 2009 by Nortek Resources of Thorburn, Nova Scotia (http://www.nortekresources.com/). Image classification was conducted using eCognition Developer v. 8 Software, which first segments the image into spectrally similar units, which were then classified manually. Additionally, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (Gulf Region, Moncton, NB) conducted a visual field survey in the same field season at 126 sites. Two-thirds of these sites were used to assist in image classification, while the remainder were used to assess accuracy. Three classes were identified: i. Good Quality Eelgrass: relatively dense, clean, green blades with minimal epiphytes or algal growth. ii. Medium Quality Eelgrass: predominately green blades that may have some epiphyte or algal growth. These stands can be less or equally dense as Good Quality Eelgrass, but the best grasses are certainly not as abundant. iii. Eelgrass Absent/Poor Quality: eelgrass is absent, or if it is present it is typically covered with epiphytes or other algae or dying or dead. Eelgrass was classified correctly 81% of the time in a fuzzy accuracy assessment technique, whereby those classes that were ‘off’ by one class, e.g. Good Quality eelgrass classed as Medium Quality, were given half credit towards the overall accuracy. Of 39 sites that were within the classification area, 27 were correct, 9 were "one-off", and 3 were incorrect [(27 + (9/2))/ 39 = 0.81]. 4. Richibucto Eelgrass classification in Richibucto Harbour, New Brunswick. Derived from a Quickbird satellite image collected on August 28, 2007 at as close to low-tide as possible. Quickbird's ground resolution is 2.4 m. Classification was objected-oriented using Definiens software. Accuracy was 81.5%. Data used for accuracy and training was collected along transects using a differential GPS positioned towfish holding sidescan sonar, and a video camera that was later transcribed as XY points to describe eel-grass presence. 5. Saint-Simon An eelgrass distribution map was classified from remotely sensed imagery in Shippagan Harbour, New Brunswick. Derived from a Quickbird satellite image collected on July 27, 2007 at as close to low-tide as possible. Classification was objected-oriented using Definiens software. Data used for accuracy and training was collected along transects using a differential GPS positioned towfish holding sidescan sonar, and a video camera that was later transcribed as XY points to describe eel-grass presence. 6. Tracadie This dataset contains results from an eelgrass classification for Tracadie Bay, New Brunswick. True colour aerial photography at 57 centimetre resolution was collected on September 2, 2009 by Nortek Resources of Thorburn, Nova Scotia (http://www.nortekresources.com/). Image classification was conducted using eCognition Developer v. 8 Software, which first segments the image into spectrally similar units, which were then classified manually. Additionally, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (Gulf Region, Moncton, NB) conducted a visual field survey in the same field season at 101 sites. Approximately two-thirds of these sites were used to assist in image classification, while the remainder was used to assess accuracy. Three classes were identified: i. Good Quality Eelgrass: relatively dense, clean, green blades with minimal epiphytes or algal growth. ii. Medium Quality Eelgrass: predominately green blades that may have some epiphyte or algal growth. These stands can be less or equally dense as Good Quality Eelgrass, but the best grasses are certainly not as abundant. iii. Eelgrass Absent/Poor Quality: eelgrass is absent, or if it is present it is typically covered with epiphytes or other algae or dying or dead. Eelgrass was classified correctly 79.3% of the time in a fuzzy accuracy assessment technique, whereby those classes that were ‘off’ by one class, e.g. Good Quality eelgrass classed as Medium Quality, were given half credit towards the overall accuracy. Of 29 sites that were within the classification area, 18 were correct, 10 were "one-off", and 1 was incorrect [(18 + (10/2))/ 29 = 0.793]. 7. Cocagne Visible orthorectified aerial photography was used to classify polygons containing eelgrass in Cocagne Harbour. Field data for image training and validation were collected along transects in summer 2008 using a dGPS positioned towfish holding sidescan sonar and a video camera that was later transcribed as XY geographic points to describe eelgrass presence and a qualitative description of density. The area was flown for photography on September 24, 2008. eCognition Developer 8 software was used to segment the imagery, essentially polygons. Polygons were then classified manually for the presence of eelgrass. Using field data revealed eelgrass presence to be mapped correctly 87.2% of the time.

As part of a scientific assessment of critical habitat for boreal woodland caribou (Environment Canada 2011, see full reference in accompanying documentation), Environment Canada's Landscape Science and Technology Division was tasked with providing detailed anthropogenic disturbance mapping, across known caribou ranges, as of 2010. The attached dataset comprises the second 5-year update (first one in 2015) bringing the data up to 2020. The original disturbance mapping was based on 30-metre resolution Landsat-5 imagery from 2008-2010. Since then, anthropogenic disturbances within 51 caribou ranges across Canada were remapped every five years to create a nationally consistent, reliable and repeatable geospatial dataset that followed a common methodology. The ranges were defined by individual provinces and territories across Canada. The methods developed were focused on mapping disturbances at a specific point of time, and were not designed to identify the age of disturbances, which can be of particular interest for disturbances that can be considered non-permanent, for example cutblocks. The resultant datasets were used for a caribou resource selection function (habitat modeling) and to assess overall disturbance levels on each caribou ranges. As with the 2010 mapping project, anthropogenic disturbance was defined as any human-caused disturbance to the natural landscape that could be visually identified from Landsat 30-metre multi-band imagery at a viewing scale of 1:50,000. The same concept was followed for the 2015 and 2020 disturbance mapping and any additional disturbance features that were observed since the original mapping date, were added. The 2015 database was used as a starting point for the 2020 database. Unlike the previous iteration, features were not removed in the mapping process which was a decision made in the name of time. Interpretation was carried out based on the most recent cloud free imagery available up to mid fall for a given year. Each disturbance feature type was represented in the database by a line or polygon depending on their geometric description. Linear disturbances included: roads, railways, powerlines, seismic exploration lines, pipelines, dams, air strips, as well as unknown features. Polygonal disturbances included: cutblocks, harvest (added in 2020), mines, built-up areas, well sites, agriculture, oil and gas facilities, as well as unknown features. For each type of anthropogenic disturbance, a clear description was established (see Appendix 7.2 of the science assessment) to maintain consistency in identifying the various disturbances in the imagery by the different interpreters. Features were only digitized if they were clearly visible in the Landsat imagery at the prescribed viewing scale. In comparison to the previous mapping protocol, one enhancement to the mapping process in 2020 was the addition of CFS harvest polygons (Ref: NRCan-CFS NTEMS; Wulder 2020) into the database prior to interpretation. This considerably reduced the digitizing time for polygons and accelerated the data collection process. The CFS harvest polygons were checked before inclusion, removing some which had been generated erroneously in their process. A 2nd interpreter quality-control phase was carried out to ensure high quality, complete and consistent data collection. Subsequently, the vector data of individual linear and polygonal disturbances were buffered by a 500-metre radius, representing their extended zone of impact upon boreal caribou herds. Additionally, forest fire polygons for the past forty years (CNFDB 1981-2020) were merged into the buffered anthropogenic footprint in order to create an overall disturbance footprint. These buffered datasets were used in the calculation of range disturbance levels and for integrated risk assessment analysis.