This dataset provides marine bacteriological water quality data for bivalve shellfish harvest areas in Canada (British Columbia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Quebec). Shellfish harvest area water temperature and salinity data are also provided as adjuncts to the interpretation of fecal coliform concentration data. The latter is the indicator of fecal contamination monitored by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) within the framework of the Canadian Shellfish Sanitation Program (CSSP). The geospatial positions of the sampling sites are also provided. These data are collected by ECCC for the purpose of making recommendations on the classification of shellfish harvest area waters. ECCC recommendations are reviewed and adopted by Regional Interdepartmental Shellfish Committees prior to regulatory implementation by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO).

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 The classification may be superseded at any time by regulatory orders issued by DFO, which place areas in Closed Status, due to conditions such as sewage overflows or elevated biotoxin levels.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

Multi-model ensembles of surface wind speed based on projections from twenty-nine Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) global climate models are available for 1900-2100. Specifically, the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 95th percentiles of the monthly, seasonal and annual ensembles of surface wind speed (m/s) are available for the historical time period, 1900-2005, and for emission scenarios, RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5, for 2006-2100. Note: Projections among climate models can vary because of differences in their underlying representation of earth system processes. Thus, the use of a multi-model ensemble approach has been demonstrated in recent scientific literature to likely provide better-projected climate change information.

Multi-model ensembles of snow depth based on projections from twenty-eight Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) global climate models are available for 1900-2100. Specifically, the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 95th percentiles of the monthly, seasonal and annual ensembles of snow depth (m) are available for the historical time period, 1900-2005, and for emission scenarios, RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5, for 2006-2100. Note: Projections among climate models can vary because of differences in their underlying representation of earth system processes. Thus, the use of a multi-model ensemble approach has been demonstrated in recent scientific literature to likely provide better projected climate change information.

Seasonal and annual multi-model ensembles of projected change (also known as anomalies) in surface wind speed based on an ensemble of twenty-nine Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) global climate models are available for 1900-2100. Projected change in wind speed is with respect to the reference period of 1986-2005 and expressed as a percentage (%). The 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 95th percentiles of the ensemble of wind speed change are available for the historical time period, 1900-2005, and for emission scenarios, RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5, for 2006-2100. Twenty-year average changes in wind speed (%) for four time periods (2021-2040; 2041-2060; 2061-2080; 2081-2100), with respect to the reference period of 1986-2005, for RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 are also available in a range of formats. The median projected change across the ensemble of CMIP5 climate models is provided. Note: Projections among climate models can vary because of differences in their underlying representation of earth system processes. Thus, the use of a multi-model ensemble approach has been demonstrated in recent scientific literature to likely provide better projected climate change information.

Multi-model ensembles of sea ice concentration based on projections from twenty-eight Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) global climate models are available for 1900-2100. Specifically, the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 95th percentiles of the monthly, seasonal and annual ensembles of sea ice concentration as represented as the percentage (%) of grid cell area, are available for the historical time period, 1900-2005, and for emission scenarios, RCP2.6, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5, for 2006-2100. Note: Projections among climate models can vary because of differences in their underlying representation of earth system processes. Thus, the use of a multi-model ensemble approach has been demonstrated in recent scientific literature to likely provide better projected climate change information.

The Canadian Aquatic Biomonitoring Network (CABIN) is an aquatic biomonitoring program for assessing the health of fresh water ecosystems in Canada. Benthic macroinvertebrates are collected at a site location and their counts are used as an indicator of the health of that water body. CABIN is based on the network of networks approach that promotes inter-agency collaboration and data-sharing to achieve consistent and comparable reporting on fresh water quality and aquatic ecosystem conditions in Canada. The program is maintained by Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) to support the collection, assessment, reporting and distribution of biological monitoring information. A set of nationally standardized CABIN protocols are used for field collection, laboratory work, and analysis of biological monitoring data. A training program is available to certify participants in the standard protocols. There are two types of sites in the CABIN database (reference and test). Reference sites represent habitats that are closest to “natural” before any human impact. The data from reference sites are used to create reference models that CABIN partners use to evaluate their test sites in an approach known as the Reference Condition Approach (RCA). Using the RCA models, CABIN partners match their test sites to groups of reference sites on similar habitats and compare the observed macroinvertebrate communities. The extent of the differences between the test site communities and the reference site communities allows CABIN partners to estimate the severity of the impacts at those locations. CABIN samples have been collected since 1987 and are organized in the database by study (partner project). The data is delineated by the 11 major drainage areas (MDA) found in Canada and each one has a corresponding study, habitat and benthic invertebrate data file. Links to auxiliary water quality data are provided when available. Visits may be conducted at the same location over time with repeat site visits being identified by identical study name / site code with different dates. All data collected by the federal government is available on Open Data and more partners are adding their data continually. The csv files are updated monthly. Contact the CABIN study authority to request permission to access non open data.

The Great Lakes Migrant Waterfowl Surveys provide periodic data on waterfowl abundance, spatial and temporal distributions, and use along the shorelines of major water bodies and river systems in Ontario during mostly during spring and fall, and to a lesser extent during summer and winter, seasons. The primary survey area covers the shoreline and nearshore (~1km) waters of the Lower Great Lakes region of Ontario, specifically including the St. Lawrence River, Lake Ontario, Niagara River, Lake Erie, Detroit River and Lake St. Clair and associated major marshes and embayments. Aerial surveys, typically flown several times within spring (March –May: 1969, 1971, 1972, 1975 –1979, 1981, 1982, 1984 –1988, 1991 –1996, 1998 –2003 & 2009 –2011) and fall (September –December: 1968, 1970, 1971, 1974 –2003 & 2009 –2011) survey periods, have been conducted periodically on a relatively regular basis (approx. 5-10 years) along the Lower Great Lakes shorelines between 1968 and 2011. Smaller-scale surveys also have been conducted periodically during summer (June –August: 1968 –1970, 1972, 1974, 1975, 1977, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1989, 1999 & 2002) in this region. This survey often has been conducted in conjunction with the Midwinter Survey, so its data (up to 2004) also are included in the CWS Migrant Waterfowl Surveys database (Year ≥2004 & Month = January & February).Data from several aerial surveys conducted periodically during the non-breeding period outside the Lower Great Lakes region also are included in this database. Spring and fall surveys have been conducted along the shorelines and nearshore waters of the Upper Great Lakes region of Ontario, specifically at St. Clair River (Fall 2012 & 2013), Lake Huron (Fall 1973, 1996; Spring 1974) / Georgian Bay (Fall 1973, 1996, 2012 & 2013) & Lake Superior (Fall 2000). Aerial surveys also have been conducted inland in southeastern Ontario along the Rideau River (Fall 1998 & Spring 1999).

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.

Annual and five-year (5YA) average wet deposition maps for the nitrate ion are available. The file formats include geodatabase files (*.gdb) compatible with geospatial software (e.g. ESRI ArcGIS) and KMZ files compatible with virtual globe software (e.g. Google Earth™). Maps can also be viewed online via Open Maps and the ArcGIS online viewer. Annual deposition from each site was screened for completeness using the following criteria: (1) precipitation amounts were recorded for >90% of the year and >60% of each quarter, and (2) nitrate concentrations were reported for >70% of the precipitation measured over the year and for >60% of each quarter. Five-year average wet deposition values are averaged annual deposition values with a completeness criterion >60% for the five-year period. Units for wet deposition fluxes are in kg of NO3 per hectare per year (kg ha-1 y-1). Sources of measurement data and spatial interpolation method are described here: https://doi.org/10.18164/e8896575-1fb8-4e53-8acd-8579c3c055c2. Recommended citation: Environment and Climate Change Canada, [year published]. NO3 Wet Deposition Maps. Air Quality Research Division, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. [URL/DOI], accessed [date]. Recommended acknowledgement: The author(s) acknowledge Environment and Climate Change Canada for the provision of Canada-U.S. wet deposition kriging maps accessed from the Government of Canada Open Government Portal at open.canada.ca, and the data providers referenced therein.