This visualization product displays the spatial distribution of seafloor litter density per trawl. EMODnet Chemistry included the collection of marine litter in its 3rd phase. Since the beginning of 2018, data of seafloor litter collected by international fish-trawl surveys have been gathered and processed in the EMODnet Chemistry Marine Litter Database (MLDB). The harmonization of all the data has been the most challenging task considering the heterogeneity of the data sources, sampling protocols (OSPAR and MEDITS protocols) and reference lists used on a European scale. Moreover, within the same protocol, different gear types are deployed during bottom trawl surveys. In cases where the wingspread and/or number of items were/was unknown, it was not possible to use the data because these fields are needed to calculate the density. Data collected before 2011 are concerned by this filter. When the distance reported in the data was null, it was calculated from: - the ground speed and the haul duration using the following formula: Distance (km) = Haul duration (h) * Ground speed (km/h); - the trawl coordinates if the ground speed and the haul duration were not filled in. The swept area was calculated from the wingspread (which depends on the fishing gear type) and the distance trawled: Swept area (km²) = Distance (km) * Wingspread (km) Densities were calculated on each trawl and year using the following computation: Density (number of items per km²) = ∑Number of items / Swept area (km²) Then a grid with 30km x 30km cells was used to calculate the weighted mean of densities in each cell from the formula : Weighted mean (number of items per km²) = ∑ (Distance (km) * Density (number of items per km²)) / ∑ Distance (km) Percentiles 50, 75, 95 & 99 were calculated taking into account data for all years. More information on data processing and calculation are detailed in the attached methodology document. Warning: the absence of data on the map does not necessarily mean that they do not exist, but that no information has been entered in the Marine Litter Database for this area. This work is based on the work presented in the following scientific article: O. Gerigny, M. Brun, M.C. Fabri, C. Tomasino, M. Le Moigne, A. Jadaud, F. Galgani, Seafloor litter from the continental shelf and canyons in French Mediterranean Water: Distribution, typologies and trends, Marine Pollution Bulletin, Volume 146, 2019, Pages 653-666, ISSN 0025-326X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.07.030.

A novel towfish incorporating sidescan and video hardware was used to ground truth echosounder data for the nearshore of Halifax Harbour. The resulting sampling grid extended from the shoreline to a depth of 10 m, including Bedford Basin through the Inner Harbour to the Outer Harbour. Each of these three zones could be distinguished from the others based upon combinations of substrate type, benthic invertebrates, and macrophyte canopy. Bedford Basin had a relative lack of macrophytes and evidence of intense herbivory. The Inner Harbour was characterized by shoreline hardening due to anthropogenic activities. The Outer Harbour was the most “natural” nearshore area with a mix of bottom types and a relatively abundant and diverse macrophyte canopy. All survey data were placed into a GIS, which could be used to answer management questions such as the placement and character of habitat compensation projects in the harbour. Future surveys utilizing similar techniques could be used to determine long term changes in the nearshore of the harbour. Cite this data as: Vandermeulen H. Data of: A Video, Sidescan and Echosounder Survey of Nearshore Halifax Harbour. Published: September 2021. Coastal Ecosystems Science Division, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, N.S. https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/9122c3e2-3cfc-45d0-ac36-aecb306130f6

Long-term measurements of sea water properties collected by sensor buoy in Adventfjorden as part of the Svalbard Integrated Arctic Earth Observing System (SIOS).

The Coastal Environmental Baseline Program is a multi-year Fisheries and Oceans Canada initiative designed to work with Indigenous and local communities and other key parties to collect coastal environmental data at six pilot sites across Canada (Port of Vancouver, Port of Prince Rupert, Lower St. Lawrence Estuary, Port of Saint John, Placentia Bay, and Iqaluit). The goal of the Program is to gather local information in these areas in effort to build a better understanding of marine ecological conditions. The Maritimes region has developed a physical oceanography program to align with the oceanographic interests and data needs of local communities and stakeholders, with the goal of sharing this information via open data. Starting in 2019, oceanographic parameters including temperature, salinity, depth, turbidity and currents have been continuously monitored at a series of locations covering a broad range of environments in the Port of Saint John and approaches vicinity, including the lower Saint John and Kennebecasis rivers, coastal fringe marshes and embayments, as well as the Musquash estuary Marine Protected Area (MPA). This dataset includes CTD data starting in 2019 and turbidity data from August 2020. Data collection methods range from bottom-mounted instruments in water depths of 10-50 meters, buoyant surface moorings, and hard-mounted instruments in intertidal zones. Intertidal data is interrupted during some low tide events, where the water level drops below the sensor, resulting in loss of functionality for periods up to 1-2 hours. Overall this dataset captures a dynamic balance between salt and fresh water on the highly tidal lower Saint John river, coastal seasonal dynamics in near-shore marine environments in the Musquash MPA, and the constant fluctuations of intertidal creeks and marshes. Update 2 - April 2025: included 2023-24 data Update 1 - Nov 2023: included 2022 data; removed daylight savings errors from 2019, 2020 and 2021; updated position for Evandale surface mooring.

This product displays for DDT, DDE, and DDD, median values since 2012 that have been measured per matrix and are present in EMODnet regional contaminants aggregated datasets, v2024. The median values ranges are derived from the following percentiles: 0-25%, 25-75%, 75-90%, >90%. Only "good data" are used, namely data with Quality Flag=1, 2, 6, Q (SeaDataNet Quality Flag schema). For water, only surface values are used (0-15 m), for sediment and biota data at all depths are used.

Figure 3.2.2a: Relative abundance of major eukaryote taxonomic groups found by high throughput sequencing of the small-subunit (18S) rRNA gene across Arctic Marine Areas. Figure 3.2.2b: Relative abundance of major eukaryote functional groups found by microscopy in the Arctic Marine Areas. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/plankton" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 70 - Figures 3.2.2a and 3.2.2b

Description: These commercial whale watching data are comprised of two datasets. First, the ‘whale_watching_trips_jun_sep_british_columbia’ data layer summarizes commercial whale watching trips that took place in 2019, 2020 and 2021 during the summer months (June to September). The second data layer, ‘wildlife_viewing_events_jun_sep_british_columbia’ contains estimated wildlife viewing events carried out by commercial whale watching vessels for the same years (2019, 2020 and 2021) and months (June to September). Commercial whale watching trips and wildlife viewing events are summarized using the same grid, and they can be related using the unique cell identifier field ‘cell_id’. The bulk of this work was carried out at University of Victoria and was funded by the Marine Environmental Observation, Prediction and Response (MEOPAR) Network under the ‘Whale watching AIS Vessel movement Evaluation’ or WAVE project (2018 – 2022). The aim of the WAVE project was to increase the understanding of whale watching activities in Canada’s Pacific region using vessel traffic data derived from AIS (Automatic Identification System). The work was finalized by DFO Science in the Pacific Region. These spatial data products of commercial whale watching operations can be used to inform Marine Spatial Planning, conservation planning activities, and threat assessments involving vessel activities in British Columbia. Methods: A list of commercial whale watching vessels based in British Columbia and Washington State and their corresponding MMSIs (Maritime Mobile Service Identity) was compiled from the whale watching companies and Marine Traffic (www.marinetraffic.com). This list was used to query cleaned CCG AIS data to extract AIS positions corresponding to commercial whale watching vessels. A commercial whale watching trip was defined as a set of consecutive AIS points belonging to the same vessel departing and ending in one of the previously identified whale watching home ports. A classification model (unsupervised Hidden Markov Model) using vessel speed as the main variable was developed to classify AIS vessel positions into wildlife-viewing and non wildlife viewing events. Commercial whale watching trips in the south and north-east of Vancouver Island were limited to a duration of minimum 1 hour and maximum 3.5 hours. For trips in the west coast of Vancouver island the maximum duration was set to 6 hours. Wildlife-viewing events duration was set to minimum of 10 minutes to a maximum of 1 hour duration. For more information on methodology, consult metadata pdf available with the Open Data record. References: Nesdoly, A. 2021. Modelling marine vessels engaged in wildlife-viewing behaviour using Automatic Identification Systems (AIS). Available from: https://dspace.library.uvic.ca/handle/1828/13300. Data Sources: Oceans Network Canada (ONC) provided encoded AIS data for years 2019, 2020 and 2021, within a bounding box including Vancouver Island and Puget Sound used to generate these products. This AIS data was in turn provided by the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) via a licensing agreement between the CCG and ONC for the non-commercial use of CCG AIS Data. More information here: https://www.oceannetworks.ca/science/community-based-monitoring/marine-domain-awareness-program/ Molly Fraser provided marine mammal sightings data collected on board a whale watching vessels to develop wildlife-viewing events classification models. More information about this dataset here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X20306709?via%3Dihub Uncertainties: The main source of uncertainty is with the conversion of AIS point locations into track segments, specifically when the distance between positions is large (e.g., greater than 1000 meters).

Sponge reefs are constructed by hexactinellid (glass) sponges of the Order Hexactinosida. The sponges trap fine sediments, and over centuries of sponge growth and sediment trapping, form large bioherms or reef mounds. Glass sponge reefs are unique habitats found along the Pacific coast of Canada and the United States and they have significant historic, ecological, and economic value. They link benthic and pelagic environments by playing important roles in filtration and carbon and nitrogen processing, and acting as silica sinks. They also form habitat for diverse communities of invertebrates and fish, including those of economic importance. Thus, accurate and up-to-date information on the location and spatial extent of sponge reefs is important to the management and conservation of many of Canada’s Pacific marine species. We generated a map of known sponge reefs, derived from two source shape files: 1) Sponge_Reef_West_Coast, mapped by Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), 2) Howesound_Nine_reef_polygons and 3) HoweSound_Five_reef_polygons, which were mapped by DFO and NRCan. The resultant polygon shapefile is published on the GIS hub as a file geodatabase feature class.

Megafauna distribution of biomass (g/15 min trawling) in the Barents Sea in 2007, 2011 and 2015. The green circles show the distribution of the snow crab as it spreads from east to west, and the blue triangles show the invasion of king crab along the coast of the southern Barents Sea. Data from Institute of Marine Research, Norway and the Polar Research Institute of Marine Fisheries and Oceanography, Murmansk, Russia. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - <a href="https://arcticbiodiversity.is/findings/benthos" target="_blank">Chapter 3</a> - Page 95 - Figure 3.3.2 The annual joint Norwegian–Russian Ecosystem Survey provides from more than 400 stations and during extensive cruise tracks covering more or less the whole Barents Sea in August– September. The sampling is based on a regular grid spanning about 1.5 millionkm2 with fixed positions of stations which make it possible to measure changes in spatial distribution over time. The trawl is a Campelen 1800 bottom trawl rigged with rock-hopper groundgear and towed on double Warps. The mesh size is 80 mm (stretched) in the front and 16–22 mmin the cod end, allowing the capture and retention of smaller fish and the largest benthos from the seabed (benthic megafauna). The horizontal opening was 11.7 m, and the vertical opening 4–5 m (Teigsmark and Øynes, 1982). The trawl configuration and bottom contact was monitored remotely by SCANMAR trawl sensors. The standard distance between trawl stations was 35 nautical miles (65 km), except north and west of Svalbard where a stratified sampling was adapted to the steep continental shelve. The standard procedure was to tow 15 min after the trawl had made contact with the bottom, but the actual tow duration ranged between 5 min and 1 h and data were subsequently standardized to 15 min trawl time. Towing speed was 3 knots, equivalent to a towing distance of 0.75 nautical miles (1.4 km) during a 15 min tow. The trawl catches were recorded using the same procedures on the Russian and the Norwegian Research vessels to ensure comparability across Barents Sea regions. The benthic megafauna was separated from the fish and shrimp catch, washed, and sorted to lowest possible taxonomic level, in most cases to species, on-Board the vessel. Species identification was standardized between the researcher teams by annually exchanging the benthic expert’s among the vessels and taxon names were fixed each year according toWORMSwhen possible.This resulted in an Electronic identification manual and photo-compendium as a tool to standardize taxon identifications, in addition to various sources of identification literature. Difficult taxa were photographed and, in some cases, brought back as preserved voucher specimens for further identification. Wet-weight biomass was recorded with electronic scales in the ship laboratories for each taxon.The biomass determination included all fragments.

Trends in abundance of plankton Focal Ecosystem Components across each Arctic Marine Area. STATE OF THE ARCTIC MARINE BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 4 - Page 178 - Figure 4.2