This visualization product displays beaches locations where non-MSFD monitoring surveys, research & cleaning operations have been applied to collate data on macrolitter (> 2.5 cm). Reference lists associated with these protocols have been indicated with different colors in the map. EMODnet Chemistry included the collection of marine litter in its 3rd phase. Since the beginning of 2018, data of beach litter 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 and reference lists used on a European scale. Preliminary processings were necessary to harmonize all the data: - Exclusion of OSPAR 1000 protocol: in order to follow the approach of OSPAR that it is not including these data anymore in the monitoring; - Selection of surveys from non-MSFD monitoring, cleaning and research operations; - Exclusion of beaches without coordinates; - Some categories & some litter types like organic litter, small fragments (paraffin and wax; items > 2.5cm) and pollutants have been removed. The list of selected items is attached to this metadata. This list was created using EU Marine Beach Litter Baselines, the European Threshold Value for Macro Litter on Coastlines and the Joint list of litter categories for marine macro-litter monitoring from JRC (these three documents are attached to this metadata). More information is available in the attached documents. 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.

Bay Scale Assessment of Nearshore Habitat Bras d'Or Lake - St. Andrews 2011 data is part of the publication Bay Scale Assessment of Nearshore Habitat Bras d'Or Lakes. A history of nearshore benthic surveys of Bras d’Or Lake from 2005 – 2011 is presented. Early work utilized drop camera and fixed mount sidescan. The next phase was one of towfish development, where camera and sidescan were placed on one platform with transponder-based positioning. From 2009 to 2011 the new towfish was used to ground truth an echosounder. The surveys were performed primarily in the northern half of the lake; from 10 m depth right into the shallows at less than 1 m. Different shorelines could be distinguished from others based upon the relative proportions of substrate types and macrophyte canopy. The vast majority of macrophytes occurred within the first 3 m of depth. This zone was dominated by a thin but consistent cover of eelgrass (Zostera marina L.) on almost all shores with a current or wave regime conducive to the growth of this plant. However, the eelgrass beds were frequently in poor shape and the negative impacts of commonly occurring water column turbidity, siltation, or possible localized eutrophication, are suspected. All survey data were placed into a Geographic Information System, and this document is a guide to that package. The Geographic Information System could be used to answer management questions such as the placement and character of habitat compensation projects, the selection of nearshore protected areas or as a baseline to determine long term changes., Vandermeulen, H. 2016. Video-sidescan and echosounder surveys of nearshore Bras d’Or Lake. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 3183: viii + 39 p. Cite this data as: Vandermeulen H. Bay Scale Assessment of Nearshore Habitat Bras d'Or Lake - St. Andrews 2011. Published May 2022. Coastal Ecosystems Science Division, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, N.S.

To develop a database of high quality CTD observations at key locations in DFO’s Pacific Region, 22 stations have been selected for sampling as often as possible. Chief Scientists of DFO vessels with CTD equipment on board are asked to acquire a CTD profile at as many of these stations as possible. There may be circumstances that will prevent conducting a CTD cast but the intent is to collect as many as possible such that over time useful time series of CTD profiles will be available at these locations.

This visualization product displays the number of non-MSFD monitoring surveys, research & cleaning operations and the associated temporal coverage per beach. EMODnet Chemistry included the collection of marine litter in its 3rd phase. Since the beginning of 2018, data of beach litter 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 and reference lists used on a European scale. Preliminary processing were necessary to harmonize all the data: - Exclusion of OSPAR 1000 protocol: in order to follow the approach of OSPAR that it is not including these data anymore in the monitoring; - Selection of surveys from non-MSFD monitoring, cleaning and research operations; - Exclusion of beaches without coordinates. More information is available in the attached documents. Warning: the absence of data on the map doesn't necessarily mean that they don't exist, but that no information has been entered in the Marine Litter Database for this area.

A towfish containing sidescan and video hardware was used to map eelgrass in two shallow northern New Brunswick estuaries. The sidescan and video data were useful in documenting suspected impacts of oyster aquaculture gear and eutrophication on eelgrass. With one boat and a crew of three, the mapping was accomplished at a rate of almost 10 km2 per day. That rate far exceeds what could be accomplished by a SCUBA based survey with the same crew. Moreover, the towfish survey applied with a complementary echosounder survey is potentially a more cost effective mapping method than satellite based remote sensing. Cite this data as: Vandermeulen H. Data of: Bay Scale Assessment of Eelgrass Beds Using Sidescan and Video - Shippagan 2007. Published: November 2019. Coastal Ecosystems Science Division, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, N.S. https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/6454594e-c8f9-41c4-801a-db125b8a8875

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

This dataset is part of Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Shoreline Classification and Pre-Spill database. Shoreline classification data has been developed for use by the Environmental Emergencies Program of Environment and Climate Change Canada for environmental protection purposes. Marine and freshwater shorelines are classified according to the character (substrate and form) of the upper intertidal (foreshore) or upper swash zone (Sergy, 2008). This is the area where oil from a spill usually becomes stranded and where treatment or cleanup activities take place. The basic parameter that defines the shoreline type is the material that is present in the intertidal zone. The presence or absence of sediments is a key factor in determining whether oil is stranded on the surface of a substrate or can penetrate and/or be buried. This dataset contains thousands of linear shoreline segments ranging in length from 200 m and 2 km long. The entities represent the location of the segments and their geomorphological description. There exist further fields in the attribute table for this dataset. We are currently working on standardizing our shoreline segmentation datasets and the updated data will soon be uploaded to the catalog. Sergy, G. (2008). The Shoreline Classification Scheme for SCAT and Oil Spill Response in Canada. Proceedings of the 31stArctic and Marine Oil Spill Program Technical Seminar.Environment Canada, Ottawa, ON, Pp. 811-819.

The Brier Island/Digby Neck area has been identified as an Ecologically and Biologically Significant Area (EBSA) by Fisheries and Oceans Canada and is one of four marine areas within the Bay of Fundy recognised by Parks Canada as of national significance for marine conservation planning. The area is representative of important outer Bay of Fundy features with significant marine mammal, bird, and benthic diversity including potentially important aggregations of sensitive benthic species such as horse mussel and sponge. Much of the information used for this recognition is now over 40 years old and should be re-validated using standardised georeferenced survey methods. As a first phase, a diver-based survey of the sublittoral habitats and associated species was conducted in August and September of 2017 for the Brier Island area. This report summarises the major sublittoral habitat types, species assemblages, and oceanographic conditions observed at 20 locations including Northwest and Southwest Ledges, Gull Rock, Peter’s Island, and Grand Passage. A total of 962 records were made of 178 taxa, consisting of 43 algae and 135 animals. Comparison with historical records largely confirmed the continued presence of unique habitats and species assemblages for which this area was initially recognised as an EBSA. Differences in species richness observed for cryptic and less known taxonomic groups such as sponges and bryozoans were attributable to changes in survey methods and knowledge. Based on these findings, additional surveys of inshore and offshore Brier Island using more quantitative methods developed for other Bay of Fundy EBSAs would further support regional MPA network planning and provide relative scales of species diversity and habitat coverage for this area.

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.

Description: Seasonal climatologies (temperature, salinity, and sigma-t) of the Northeast Pacific Ocean were computed from historical observations including all available conductivity-temperature-depth (CTD), bottle, expendable bathy-thermograph (XBT), and Argo data in NOAA (http://www.argo.ucsd.edu/), Marine Environmental Data Service (MEDS), and Institute of Ocean Sciences archives over 1980 to 2010 period in spatial resolution ranging from approximately 100m to 70km. Methods: Calculations, including smooth and interpolation, were carried out in sixty-five subregions and up to fifty-two vertical levels from surface to 5000m. Seasonal averages were computed as the median of yearly seasonal values. 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. 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.