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).

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.

Multi-model ensembles of mean precipitation based on projections from twenty-nine Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) global climate models are available for 1901-2100. Specifically, the 5th, 25th, 50th, 75th and 95th percentiles of the monthly, seasonal and annual ensembles of mean precipitation (mm/day) are available for the historical time period, 1901-2005, 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.

Annual and five-year (5YA) average wet deposition maps for the ammonium 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) ammonium 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 NH4 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]. NH4 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.

This dataset provides geospatial polygon boundaries for marine bivalve shellfish harvest area classification in British Columbia, 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

Seasonal and annual multi-model ensembles of projected change (also known as anomalies) in snow depth based on an ensemble of twenty-eight Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) global climate models are available for 1900-2100. Projected change in snow depth 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 snow depth 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 snow depth (%) 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.

Air emissions from oil sands development can come from a number of sources including industrial smokestacks, tailings ponds, transportation, and dust from mining operations. Air quality monitoring under the Joint Canada-Alberta Implementation Plan for the Oil Sands is designed to determine the contribution of emissions from oil sands activities to local and regional air quality and atmospheric deposition both now and in the future. Deposition data include: - Passive Sampling of PACs deployed for two month periods across a network of 17 sites - Active sampling of PACs at three sites to inform the amount of dry deposition - Particulate metals (24 hour integrated samples following the one in six day National Air Pollution Surveillance (NAPS) cycle)

This dataset provides geospatial polygon boundaries for marine bivalve shellfish harvest area classification in Quebec, 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

This dataset provides marine bacteriological water quality data for bivalve shellfish harvest areas in Nova Scotia, Canada. Shellfish harvest area water temperature and salinity data are also provided as adjuncts to the interpretation of fecal coliform density data. The latter is the indicator of fecal matter contamination monitored annually 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 is 'Deprecated'. Please use updated source here. https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/6417332a-7f37-49bd-8be9-ce0402deed2a

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.