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.

This dataset provides geospatial polygon boundaries for marine bivalve shellfish harvest area classification in New Brunswick, Canada. These data represent the five classification categories of marine bivalve shellfish harvest areas (Approved; Conditionally Approved; Restricted; Conditionally Restricted; and Prohibited) under the Canadian Shellfish Sanitation Program (CSSP). Data are collected by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) for the purpose of making applicable classification recommendations on the basis of sanitary and water quality survey results. ECCC recommendations are reviewed and adopted by Regional Interdepartmental Shellfish Committees prior to regulatory implementation by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). These geographic data are for illustrative purposes only; they show shellfish harvest area classifications when in Open Status. The classification may be superseded at any time by regulatory orders issued by DFO, which place areas in Closed Status, due to conditions such as sewage overflows or elevated biotoxin levels. For further information about the current status and boundary coordinates for areas under Prohibition Order, please contact your local DFO office. This dataset is 'Deprecated'. Please use updated source here. https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/7aef69b5-3aaf-4d50-bb86-083031e6dc47

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

A revised qualitative assessment of the hydrocarbon resource potential is presented for the Hudson Bay sedimentary basin that underlies Hudson Bay and adjacent onshore areas of Ontario, Manitoba, and Nunavut. The Hudson Basin is a large intracratonic sedimentary basin thatpreserves dominantly Ordovician to Devonian aged limestone and evaporite strata. Maximum preserved sediment thickness is about 2.5 km. Source rock is the petroleum system element that has the lowest chance of success; the potential source rock is thin, may be discontinuous, and the thin sedimentarycover may not have been sufficient to achieve the temperatures required to generate and expel oil from a source rock over much of the basin. The highest potential is in the center of the basin, where the hydrocarbon potential is considered amp;lt;'Mediumamp;gt;'. Hydrocarbon potential decreasestowards the edges of the basin due to fewer plays being present, and thinner strata reduce the chance of oil generation and expulsion. Quantitative hydrocarbon assessment considers seven plays. Input parameters for field size and field density (per unit area) are based on analog Michigan, Williston,and Illinois intracratonic sedimentary basins that are about the same age and that had similar depositional settings to Hudson Basin. Basin-wide play and local prospect chances of success were assigned based on local geological conditions in Hudson Bay. Each of the seven plays were analyzed in Roseand Associates PlayRA software, which performs a Monte Carlo simulation using the local chance of success matrix and field size and prospect numbers estimated from analog basins. Hudson sedimentary basin has a mean estimate of 67.3 million recoverable barrels of oil equivalent and a 10% chance ofhaving 202.2 or more million barrels of recoverable oil equivalent. The mean chance for the largest expected pool is about 15 million recoverable barrels of oil equivalent (MMBOE), and there is only a 10% chance of there being a field larger than 23.2 MMBOE recoverable. The small expected fieldsizes are based on the large analog data set from Michigan, Williston and Illinois basins, and are due to the geological conditions that create the traps. The small size of the largest expected field, the low chance of exploration success, and the small overall resource make it unlikely that there are any economically recoverable hydrocarbons in the Hudson Basin in the foreseeable future. The Southampton Island area of interest includes 93 087 km2 of nearshore waters around Southampton Island and Chesterfield Inlet in the Kivalliq Region of Nunavut. Of the total resource estimated for Hudson Bay, 14 million barrels are apportioned to the Southampton Island Area of Interest.

This data is intended to identify Canadian fresh waters which require additional measures (e.g., ballast water exchange and treatment) prior to release, as described in https://tc.canada.ca/en/marine-transportation/marine-safety/list-canada-s-designated-alternate-ballast-water-exchange-area-fresh-waters-tp-13617e-2021. The data is not intended for navigation purposes. According to Canada’s Ballast Water Regulations, vessels which are managing ballast water to meet the ballast water performance standard cannot release ballast water into fresh waters unless that ballast water was first exchanged in accordance with the ballast water exchange standard. For the purpose of this requirement, Canadian fresh waters are the following: - the waters at the Port of Kitimat and waters in or upstream of the Kitimat Arm, east of a line between Hilton Point and Steel Point; - the waters at the Port of Stewart and waters in or upstream of the Portland Canal, north of a line between Portland Point and Ramsden Point; - the waters of all Fraser River ports that are: -- east of Tilbury Island in the main arm of the Fraser River including Annacis Island and New Westminster docking areas; and -- east of the eastern tip of Mitchell Island in the north arm of Fraser River; - the waters of the Saguenay River ports and waters upstream of L’Anse-Creuse; - the waters of all St. Lawrence River ports and waters west of the east point of Ile d’Orléans including the port of Quebec City; - all Canadian waters of the Great Lakes Basin; and - the waters of Happy Valley-Goose Bay and waters of Lake Melville west of Rabbit Island. Legal Constraints: Users should be aware that the polygons depicting areas requiring additional measures to manage ballast water are intended for illustration only and should not be used for navigational or legal purposes.

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).

The water level data comes from the groundwater monitoring network of Yukon (Canadian territory). 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.

As part of the Pan-Canadian approach to transforming Species at Risk conservation in Canada, a total of 11 Priority Places were affirmed by federal, provincial, and territorial governments in December 2018. One additional priority place was affirmed in 2024. The places selected have significant biodiversity, concentrations of species at risk, and opportunities to advance conservation efforts. In each Priority Place, the federal and provincial or territorial governments are working with Indigenous Peoples, partners, and stakeholders to develop conservation action implementation plans. Using a defined planning approach (such as the Open Standards for the Practice of Conservation), these implementation plans identify key actions to address the greatest threats to species. Conservation implementation plans provide the foundation for collaborative action on the ground. The federal government, in collaboration with the provinces and territories, has agreed to the implementation of the Pan-Canadian Approach to Transforming Species at Risk Conservation in Canada. This new approach shifts from a single-species approach to conservation to one that focuses on multiple species and ecosystems. This enables conservation partners to work together to achieve better outcomes for Species at Risk. These 12 Priority Places are complemented by a suite of Community-Nominated Priority Places (CNPP), identified through an open call for applications. To learn more about the Priority Places initiative and the work undertaken by our partners to recover Species at Risk within these Priority Places, please visit our interactive website https://environmental-maps.canada.ca/CWS_Storylines/index-ca-en.html#/en/priority_places-lieux_prioritaires

An eelgrass distribution map was classified from remotely sensed imagery in Richibucto Harbour, New Brunswick. Derived from a Quickbird satellite image collected on August 28th, 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.

The map displays bedrock formations at or near the surface of the land, on the sea floor above the continental crust that forms the Canadian landmass, and oceanic crust surrounding the landmass. The bedrock units are grouped and coloured according to geological age and composition. The colours of offshore units and oceanic crust are paler and more generalized than those on land, although the constituent units offshore are still easily discernible from their dashed boundaries. This colour design, coupled with the use of a white buffer zone at the coast allows the coastline of Canada to be readily distinguished and still show the grand geological architecture of the Canadian landmass. The map also shows major faults that have disrupted the Earth's crust, onshore and offshore, and a variety of special geological features such as kimberlite pipes, which locally contain diamonds, impact structures suspected to have been caused by meteorites, and extinct and active spreading centres in the surrounding oceans.