This dataset contains the modelled and observed data used in the publication "Fjord circulation permits persistent subsurface water mass in a long, deep mid-latitude inlet" by Laura Bianucci et al., DFO Ocean Sciences Division, Pacific Region (published in the journal Ocean Science in 2024). An application of the Finite Volume Community Ocean Model (FVCOM v4.1) was run from May 24 to June 27, 2019 in the Discovery Islands region of British Columbia, Canada. Observed temperature and salinity profiles available in this area during this time period are included in the dataset, along with the modelled values at the same times and locations.

Description: Seasonal climatologies for Zooplankton biomass in seven size categories were calculated for the period 1990-2019. The data used were a subset of the Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Institute of Ocean Sciences Zooplankton Database. This dataset is incomplete and is regularly updated as analysis takes place. Methods: Data-Interpolating Variational Analysis (DIVA) was used for spatial. Seasonal averages were computed as the mean of yearly seasonal means. Spring months were defined as April to June, summer months were defined as July to September, fall months were defined as October to December, and winter months were defined as January to March. The data available here contain raster layers of seasonal Zooplankton climatology for the Canadian Pacific Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), with high spatial resolution of 1/300 degree. Uncertainties: Uncertainties are introduced when observational data are spatially interpolated to varying distances from the observation point. Climatological averages are calculated from these interpolated values. Caution should be used for data in inlets and nearshore as the interpolation does not perform well in these areas, data in some inlets have been masked.

Description: This dataset consists of three simulations from the Northeastern Pacific Canadian Ocean Ecosystem Model (NEP36-CanOE) which is a configuration of the Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean (NEMO) V3.6. The historical simulation is an estimate of the 1986-2005 mean climate. The future simulations project the 2046-2065 mean climate for representative concentration pathways (RCP) 4.5 (moderate mitigation scenario) and 8.5 (no mitigation scenario). Each simulation is forced by a climatology of atmospheric forcing fields calculated over these 20 year periods and the winds are augmented with high frequency variability, which introduces a small amount of interannual variability. Model outputs are averaged over 3 successive years of simulation (the last 3, following an equilibration period); standard deviation among the 3 years is available upon request. For each simulation, the dataset includes the air-sea carbon dioxide flux, monthly 3D fields for potential temperature, salinity, potential density, total alkalinity, dissolved inorganic carbon, nitrate, oxygen, pH, total chlorophyll, aragonite saturation state, total primary production, and monthly maximum and minimum values for oxygen, pH, and potential temperature. The data includes 50 vertical levels at a 1/36 degree spatial resolution and a mask is provided that indicates regions where these data should be used cautiously or not at all. For a more detailed description please refer to Holdsworth et al. 2021. Methods: This study uses a multi-stage downscaling approach to dynamically downscale global climate projections at a 1/36° (1.5 − 2.25 km) resolution. We chose to use the second-generation Canadian Earth System model (CanESM2) because high-resolution downscaled projections of the atmosphere over the region of interest are available from the Canadian Regional Climate Model version 4 (CanRCM4). We used anomalies from CanESM2 with a resolution of about 1° at the open boundaries, and the regional atmospheric model, CanRCM4 (Scinocca et al., 2016) for the surface boundary conditions. CanRCM4 is an atmosphere only model with a 0.22° resolution and was used to downscale climate projections from CanESM2 over North America and its adjacent oceans. The model used is computationally expensive. This is due to the relatively high number of points in the domain (715 × 1,021 × 50) and the relatively complex biogeochemical model (19 tracers). Therefore, rather than carrying out interannual simulations for the historical and future periods, we implemented a new method that uses atmospheric climatologies with augmented winds to force the ocean. We show that augmenting the winds with hourly anomalies allows for a more realistic representation of the surface freshwater distribution than using the climatologies alone. Section 2.1 describes the ocean model that is used to estimate the historical climate and project the ocean state under future climate scenarios. The time periods are somewhat arbitrary; 1986–2005 was chosen because the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) historical simulations end in 2005 as no community-accepted estimates of emissions were available beyond that date (Taylor et al., 2009); 2046–2065 was chosen to be far enough in the future that changes in 20 year mean fields are unambiguously due to changing GHG forcing (as opposed to model internal variability) (e.g., Christian, 2014), but near enough to be considered relevant for management purposes. While it is true that 30 years rather than 20 is the canonical value for averaging over natural variability, in practice the difference between a 20 and a 30 year mean is small (e.g., if we average successive periods of an unforced control run, the variance among 20 year means will be only slightly larger than for 30 year means). Also, there is concern that longer averaging periods are inappropriate in a non-stationary climate (Livezey et al., 2007; Arguez and Vose, 2011). We chose 20 year periods because they are adequate to give a mean annual cycle with little influence from natural variability, while minimizing aliasing of the secular trend into the means. As the midpoints of the two time periods are separated by 60 years, the contribution of natural variability to the differences between the historical and future simulations is negligible e.g., (Hawkins and Sutton, 2009; Frölicher et al., 2016). Section 2.2 describes how climatologies derived from observations were used for the initialization and open boundary conditions for the historical simulations and pseudo-climatologies were used for the future scenarios. The limited availability of observations means that the years used for these climatologies differs somewhat from the historical and future periods. Section 2.3 details the atmospheric forcing fields and the method that we developed to generate winds with realistic high-frequency variability while preserving the daily climatological means from the CanRCM4 data. Section 2.4 shows the equilibration of key modeled variables to the forcing conditions Data Sources: Model output Uncertainties: The historical climatologies were evaluated using observational climatologies generated from stations with a long time series of data over the time period including CTDs, nutrient profiles, lighthouse, satellite SST and buoy data. The model is able to represent the historical conditions with an acceptable bias. The resolution of this model is insufficient to represent the narrow straits and channels of this region so the dataset includes a cautionary mask to exclude these regions. These climate projections are downscaled from a single global climate model (CanESM2/CanRCM4) because the cost of ensembles is presently prohibitive. Our experimental design uses climatological forcing for each time period so the differences between them are almost entirely due to anthropogenic forcing with little effect of natural variability. We caution that our experimental design does not permit analysis of the effects of natural climate variability. We recommend using both of the scenarios (RCP4.5 and RCP8.4) to estimate the scenario uncertainty in these projections.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada has conducted a cumulative human impact mapping analysis for Pacific Canada to support ongoing Marine Spatial Planning. Cumulative impact mapping (CIM) combines spatial information on human activities, habitats, and a matrix of vulnerability weights into an intuitive relative ‘cumulative impact score’ that shows where cumulative human impacts are greatest and least. To map cumulative impacts, a recently developed ecosystem vulnerability assessment for Pacific Canadian waters (Murray et al. 2022) was combined with spatial information on thirty-eight (38) different habitat types and forty-five (45) human activities following the methodology from Halpern et al.(2008) and Murray et al. (2015). The cumulative impact map is provided in a 1x1 km grid used for oceans management by Fisheries and Oceans Canada. For further information, please contact the data provider.

Description: This dataset consists of three simulations from the Northeastern Pacific Canadian Ocean Ecosystem Model (NEP36-CanOE) which is a configuration of the Nucleus for European Modelling of the Ocean (NEMO) V3.6. The historical simulation is an estimate of the 1986-2005 mean climate. The future simulations project the 2046-2065 mean climate for representative concentration pathways (RCP) 4.5 (moderate mitigation scenario) and 8.5 (no mitigation scenario). Each simulation is forced by a climatology of atmospheric forcing fields calculated over these 20 year periods and the winds are augmented with high frequency variability, which introduces a small amount of interannual variability. Model outputs are averaged over 3 successive years of simulation (the last 3, following an equilibration period); standard deviation among the 3 years is available upon request. For each simulation, the dataset includes the air-sea carbon dioxide flux, monthly 3D fields for potential temperature, salinity, potential density, total alkalinity, dissolved inorganic carbon, nitrate, oxygen, pH, total chlorophyll, aragonite saturation state, total primary production, and monthly maximum and minimum values for oxygen, pH, and potential temperature. The data includes 50 vertical levels at a 1/36 degree spatial resolution and a mask is provided that indicates regions where these data should be used cautiously or not at all. For a more detailed description please refer to Holdsworth et al. 2021. The data available here are the outputs of NEP36-CanOE_RCP 4.5; a projection of the 2046-2065 climate for the moderate mitigation scenario RCP 4.5. Methods: This study uses a multi-stage downscaling approach to dynamically downscale global climate projections at a 1/36° (1.5 − 2.25 km) resolution. We chose to use the second-generation Canadian Earth System model (CanESM2) because high-resolution downscaled projections of the atmosphere over the region of interest are available from the Canadian Regional Climate Model version 4 (CanRCM4). We used anomalies from CanESM2 with a resolution of about 1° at the open boundaries, and the regional atmospheric model, CanRCM4 (Scinocca et al., 2016) for the surface boundary conditions. CanRCM4 is an atmosphere only model with a 0.22° resolution and was used to downscale climate projections from CanESM2 over North America and its adjacent oceans. The model used is computationally expensive. This is due to the relatively high number of points in the domain (715 × 1,021 × 50) and the relatively complex biogeochemical model (19 tracers). Therefore, rather than carrying out interannual simulations for the historical and future periods, we implemented a new method that uses atmospheric climatologies with augmented winds to force the ocean. We show that augmenting the winds with hourly anomalies allows for a more realistic representation of the surface freshwater distribution than using the climatologies alone. Section 2.1 describes the ocean model that is used to estimate the historical climate and project the ocean state under future climate scenarios. The time periods are somewhat arbitrary; 1986–2005 was chosen because the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) historical simulations end in 2005 as no community-accepted estimates of emissions were available beyond that date (Taylor et al., 2009); 2046–2065 was chosen to be far enough in the future that changes in 20 year mean fields are unambiguously due to changing GHG forcing (as opposed to model internal variability) (e.g., Christian, 2014), but near enough to be considered relevant for management purposes. While it is true that 30 years rather than 20 is the canonical value for averaging over natural variability, in practice the difference between a 20 and a 30 year mean is small (e.g., if we average successive periods of an unforced control run, the variance among 20 year means will be only slightly larger than for 30 year means). Also, there is concern that longer averaging periods are inappropriate in a non-stationary climate (Livezey et al., 2007; Arguez and Vose, 2011). We chose 20 year periods because they are adequate to give a mean annual cycle with little influence from natural variability, while minimizing aliasing of the secular trend into the means. As the midpoints of the two time periods are separated by 60 years, the contribution of natural variability to the differences between the historical and future simulations is negligible e.g., (Hawkins and Sutton, 2009; Frölicher et al., 2016). Section 2.2 describes how climatologies derived from observations were used for the initialization and open boundary conditions for the historical simulations and pseudo-climatologies were used for the future scenarios. The limited availability of observations means that the years used for these climatologies differs somewhat from the historical and future periods. Section 2.3 details the atmospheric forcing fields and the method that we developed to generate winds with realistic high-frequency variability while preserving the daily climatological means from the CanRCM4 data. Section 2.4 shows the equilibration of key modeled variables to the forcing conditions Data Sources: Model output Uncertainties: These climate projections are downscaled from a single global climate model (CanESM2/CanRCM4) because the cost of ensembles is presently prohibitive. Our experimental design uses climatological forcing for each time period so the differences between them are almost entirely due to anthropogenic forcing with little effect of natural variability.

Description: Seasonal climatologies for temperature of the Northeast Pacific Ocean were computed to cover the period 2001 to 2020. Historical observations included all available conductivity-temperature-depth (CTD), bottle and profiling floats in the NODC World Ocean Database, Marine Environmental Data Services (MEDS), Institute of Ocean Sciences Water Properties website and the Canadian Integrated Ocean Observing System (CIOOS Pacific). Methods: Interpolation was carried out in up to fifty-two vertical levels from surface to 5000m. Data-Interpolating Variational Analysis (DIVA) was used for spatial interpolation for all years within each season and estimates projected onto a consistent grid. The average of the grid nodes was calculated to obtain the seasonal climatology. DIVA was used again on the final climatology followed by a median filter and a 5-point smoother. Spring months were defined as April to June, summer months were defined as July to September, fall months were defined as October to December, and winter months were defined as January to March. The data available here contain raster layers of seasonal temperature climatologies for the Canadian Pacific Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), a subset of seasonal climatologies of the Northeast Pacific Ocean, in high spatial resolution of 1/300 degree. Data Sources: NODC, MEDS, IOS and CIOOS Pacific Data. Uncertainties: Uncertainties are introduced when quality controlled observational data are spatially interpolated to varying distances from the observation point. Climatological averages are calculated from these interpolated values.

Description: Chlorophyll-a concentration (a proxy for phytoplankton biomass) was retrieved from the MODIS instrument on the Aqua satellite, with data distributed by the NASA Ocean Biology Processing Group, and averaged into monthly climatological composites. The data span the years 2003-2020; records were created for both 1 km and 4 km pixel resolutions to be consistent with other satellite products. Methods: MODIS-Aqua Chlorophyll-a (Chl-a) was acquired from the NASA Ocean Biology Processing Group where Chl-a concentration was calculated using the OC3/OCI method. The months of January and December were excluded from these datasets, as data in the winter months at higher latitudes are missing due to low sun angle preventing acquisition. The monthly geometric mean value at all pixels was calculated for individual years, then the geometric mean and geometric standard deviation factor of chlorophyll-a were calculated by month from these images. These methods of calculating mean and standard deviation were used due to the log-normal distribution of chlorophyll-a. The geometric standard deviation is a unitless factor, where the lower bound is the ratio of the geometric mean and geometric standard deviation, and the upper bound is the multiplication of the two. In addition to the geometric mean and geometric standard deviation factor the number of occurrences of valid data at each pixel over the period of observation were calculated. Pixels with fewer than two occurrences over the entire period of observation were removed from these maps and set to a NaN value in the tif files. All resulting rasters were cropped to the Canadian Exclusive Economic Zone, assigned to the NAD83 geographic coordinate reference system (EPSG:4269), and have final pixel resolutions of approximately 0.01 degrees and 0.0417 degrees. The monthly geometric mean, monthly geometric standard deviation factor, and number of occurrences for all pixels are provided. Data Sources: NASA Ocean Biology Processing Group. (2017). MODIS-Aqua Level 2 Ocean Color Data Version R2018.0. NASA Ocean Biology Distributed Active Archive Center. https://doi.org/10.5067/AQUA/MODIS/L2/OC/2018 Uncertainties: Satellite values have been evaluated against global datasets, and datasets of samples in the Pacific region (see references). However, uncertainties are introduced when averaging together images over time as each pixel has a differing number of observations. Short-lived or spatially limited events may be missed.

This dataset contains the outputs for Bute Inlet from two simulations shown in the publication "Fjord circulation permits persistent subsurface water mass in a long, deep mid-latitude inlet" by Laura Bianucci et al., DFO Ocean Sciences Division, Pacific Region (published in the journal Ocean Science in 2024). The Finite Volume Community Ocean Model (FVCOM v4.1) was run with two different sets of initial conditions for the Discovery Islands region of British Columbia, Canada, from May 24 to June 27, 2019. The "Baseline" simulation used observed initial conditions, while the "Sensitivity" simulation removed the observed cold subsurface water mass from the initial profiles. Here in this dataset, we provide 29-day averages of the following variables in a transect along Bute Inlet: potential temperature, density, along-inlet velocity, and Brunt-Väisälä frequency (N^2). The averaging properly removes the tidal effects.

Description: Seasonal climatologies for salinity of the Northeast Pacific Ocean were computed to cover the period 2001 to 2020. Historibal observations included all available conductivity-temperature_depth (CTD), bottle and profiling floats in the NODC World Ocean Database, Marine Environmental Data Services (MEDS), Institute of Ocean Sciences Water Properties website and the Canadian Integrated Ocean Observing System (CIOOS Pacific). Methods: Interpolation was carried out in up to fifty-two vertical levels from surface to 5000m. Data-Interpolating Variational Analysis (DIVA) was used for spatial interpolation for all years within each season and estimates projected onto a consistent grid. The average of the grid nodes was calculated to obtain the seasonal climatology. DIVA was used again on the final climatology followed by a median filter and a 5-point smoother. Spring months were defined as April to June, summer months were defined as July to September, fall months were defined as October to December, and winter months were defined as January to March. The data available here contain raster layers of seasonal salinity climatology for the Canadian Pacific Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), a subset of seasonal climatology of the Northeast Pacific Ocean, with high spatial resolution of 1/300 degree. Data Sources: NODC, MEDS, IOS and CIOOS Pacific Data. Uncertainties: Uncertainties are introduced when quality controlled observational data are spatially interpolated to varying distances from the observation point. Climatological averages are calculated from these interpolated values.

Climatological monthly-mean temperature and salinity data were computed for each of the 27 Line P stations (https://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/data-donnees/line-p/index-eng.html). For any particular station, data were accepted as belonging to that station if the location was within 10 km of the intended station (or 24km at Ocean Station Papa, P26). Data were binned by month/year over all available data for each station up to and including 2012. Hence the time interval that the mean state was computed from starts between 1956 and 1960 and ends at the end of 2012. Standard deviations were computed for each month independently and at each 5-m depth bin and were estimated as the variability between different years for the month in question.