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.

The Ocean Data Inventory database is an inventory of all of the oceanographic time series data held by the Ocean Science Division at the Bedford Institute of Oceanography. The data archive includes about 5800 current meter and acoustic doppler time series, 4500 coastal temperature time series from thermographs, as well as a small number (200) of tide gauges. Many of the current meters also have temperature and salinity sensors. The area for which there are data is roughly defined as the North Atlantic and Arctic from 30° - 82° N, although there are some minor amounts of data from other parts of the world. The time period is from 1960 to present. The database is updated on a regular basis.

Number of megafauna species/taxa in the Arctic (7,322 stations in total), based on recent trawl investigations. Stations with highest species/taxon number are sorted to the top, meaning that dense concentrations of stations (e.g. Eastern Canada, Barents Sea), with low species numbers are hidden behind stations with higher species numbers. Also note that species numbers are somewhat biased by differing taxonomic resolution between studies. Data from: Icelandic Institute of Natural History, Iceland; Marine Research Institute, Iceland; University of Alaska, Fairbanks, U.S.; Greenland Institute of Natural Resources, Greenland; Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia; Université du Québec à Rimouski, Canada; Fisheries and Oceans Canada; Institute of Marine Research, Norway; and 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 91 - Box figure 3.3.2 Several regions of the Pan Arctic have been sampled with trawl. Even though the trawl configurations and the taxonomic level are different from area to area, we choose to consider the taxonomic richness as relatively comparative.

Description: In the coming decades, warming and deoxygenation of marine waters are anticipated to result in shifts in the distribution and abundance of fishes, with consequences for the diversity and composition of fish communities. Here, we combine fisheries-independent trawl survey data spanning the west coast of the USA and Canada with high-resolution regional ocean models to make projections of how 34 groundfish species will be impacted by changes in temperature and oxygen in British Columbia (BC) and Washington. In this region, species that are projected to decrease in occurrence are roughly balanced by those that are projected to increase, resulting in considerable compositional turnover. Many, but not all, species are projected to shift to deeper depths as conditions warm, but low oxygen will limit how deep they can go. Thus, biodiversity will likely decrease in the shallowest waters (less than 100 m), where warming will be greatest, increase at mid-depths (100–600 m) as shallow species shift deeper, and decrease at depths where oxygen is limited (greater than 600 m). These results highlight the critical importance of accounting for the joint role of temperature, oxygen and depth when projecting the impacts of climate change on marine biodiversity. The rasters available in this dataset project the occurrence of each of the 34 groundfish species in a 3 km^2 grid cell for the historical baseline, as well as for two emissions scenarios, from each of the two regional ocean models (BCCM and NEP36). Each projection layer is provided as the mean projected occurrence as well as the lower and upper 95% confidence interval of projected occurrence. Methods: Estimated species response curves: We estimated how the observed distribution of groundfish species is determined by temperature, dissolved oxygen and seafloor depth using data from fisheries-independent scientific research trawls spanning the entire American and Canadian west coast. We included data from 4 surveys (NOAA West Coast, NOAA Alaska, NOAA Bering or DFO Pacific) from 2000 to 2019. For each species, we modelled occurrences in the coastwide trawl dataset using a generalized linear model (GLM) using the sdmTMB package in R v. 4.0.2. The predictors were temperature, log dissolved oxygen, log depth and survey. We included quadratic terms for temperature and log depth to allow species occurrences to peak at intermediate values. We fitted a breakpoint function for log dissolved oxygen to reflect the fact oxygen is a limiting factor. We assessed the forecasting accuracy of the SDM by comparing how well a model fitted to only data from 2000 to 2010 could forecast species’ occurrences in trawls within our focal region for the period of 2011–2019. We assessed all 77 groundfish species that were present in the overall trawl dataset, however the final analysis included only the 34 species for which the models had adequate forecasting ability. Projecting groundfish biodiversity changes: We based our groundfish biodiversity change projections on two regional models that downscale climate projections: the British Columbia Continental Margin model (BCCM) and the North-Eastern Pacific Canadian Ocean Ecosystem model (NEP36-CanOE). We used a historical baseline of 1986–2005 and future projected values for 2046–2065 based on RCP 4.5 and 8.5 emissions scenarios. Using the models that we validated in our forecasting accuracy assessment, we projected the occurrence of each species in each 3 km^2 grid cell for the historical baseline, as well as for two emissions scenarios, from each of the two regional ocean models. Uncertainties: Source survey data was collected by consistent methods with survey-grade GPS for all years included. Data quality is expected to be high. Modeled data are at 3 km resolution. Outputs are as accurate as source input models and are deemed to be of high quality and accurate based upon the precision of model inputs. Projecting biodiversity responses to climate change involves considerable uncertainty and our approach allows us to quantify some aspects of this. Of the uncertainty that we could quantify, roughly half was due to uncertainty in our SDMs and the remainder was due to regional ocean model uncertainty or scenario uncertainty. This amount of uncertainty in the SDMs is typical, stemming from the fact that contemporary species distributions are also influenced by other factors that we have not included in our model. In addition, although oxygen demand is understood to vary with temperature, limitations in the implementation of breakpoint models prevented us from estimating a temperature-dependent oxygen breakpoint. However, although somewhat unrealistic, this limitation is unlikely to have greatly increased the uncertainty in our SDMs because low oxygen concentrations occurred almost exclusively at depths where temperature variation and projected change was small. To reduce uncertainty due to year-to-year variation in climate, our model projections are based on 20-year climatologies with a future period that is far enough ahead to ensure that changes are unambiguously due to greenhouse gases. We have made projections based on two different emissions scenarios, and two different regional ocean models that are both downscaled from the same global model, the second generation Canadian Earth System Model (CanESM2), using different downscaling techniques. While the BCCM model was run inter-annually and then averaged to produce the climatologies, the NEP36 model used atmospheric climatologies with augmented winds to force the ocean model and produce representative climatologies. Comparing these regional projections provides an estimate of the uncertainty across different regional downscaling models and methods. We find that the projected impacts of climate change on the groundfish community are more sensitive to the differences in the regional ocean models than they are to the emissions scenarios used. However, these differences are in magnitude (changes tend to be larger based on NEP36 compared with the BCCM) rather than in direction, with both models resulting in similar overall patterns of biodiversity change and turnover for the groundfish community. Over the 60-year time period (1986–2005 versus 2046–2065) used in our study, our projections suggest that groundfish community changes are similar regardless of the scenario used.

This dataset provides 30-year, 50-year, and 100 year return levels for small craft harbours in British Columbia, relative to the mean sea level over 1993-2020. The return levels are derived from coastal sea levels for the period from 1993 to 2020, simulated using a high-resolution Northeast Pacific Ocean Model (NEPOM).

This visualization product displays the single use plastics (SUP) related items abundance of marine macro-litter (> 2.5cm) per beach per year from non-MSFD monitoring surveys, research & cleaning operations. 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; - Selection of SUP related items only. 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). The selection was adapted to the Joint list of litter categories SUP identification and therefore contains some differences with the selection made for previously published versions of this product; - Exclusion of surveys without associated length; - Normalization of survey lengths to 100m & 1 survey / year: in some case, the survey length was not 100m, so in order to be able to compare the abundance of litter from different beaches a normalization is applied using this formula: Number of SUP related items of the survey (normalized by 100 m) = Number of SUP related items of the survey x (100 / survey length) Then, this normalized number of SUP related items is summed to obtain the total normalized number of SUP related items for each survey. Finally, the median abundance of SUP related items for each beach and year is calculated from these normalized abundances of SUP related items per survey. Percentiles 50, 75, 95 & 99 have been calculated taking into account SUP related items from other sources data for all years. 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.

This visualization product displays the cigarette related items abundance of marine macro-litter (> 2.5cm) per beach per year from non-MSFD monitoring surveys, research & cleaning operations without UNEP-MARLIN data. 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; - Selection of plastic bags related items only. 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); - Exclusion of surveys without associated length; - Normalization of survey lengths to 100m & 1 survey / year: in some case, the survey length was not 100m, so in order to be able to compare the abundance of litter from different beaches a normalization is applied using this formula: Number of plastic bags related items of the survey (normalized by 100 m) = Number of plastic bags related items of the survey x (100 / survey length) Then, this normalized number of plastic bags related items is summed to obtain the total normalized number of plastic bags related items for each survey. Finally, the median abundance of plastic bags related items for each beach and year is calculated from these normalized abundances of plastic bags related items per survey. Percentiles 50, 75, 95 & 99 have been calculated taking into account plastic bags related items from other sources data for all years. 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.

This visualization product displays the marine litter material categories percentage 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. Unlike other EMODnet seafloor litter products, all trawls surveyed since 2007 are included in this map even if the wingspread and/or the distance are/is unknown. Only surveys with an unknown number of items were excluded from this product. Harmonization of the material categories between ICES and MEDITS lists was performed and the following calculation was applied: Material % = (∑Number of items of each material category*100)/(∑Number of items of all material categories) More information on data processing and calculation are detailed in the attached 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 visualization product displays the cigarette related items abundance of marine macro-litter (> 2.5cm) per beach per year from non-MSFD monitoring surveys, research & cleaning operations without UNEP-MARLIN data. 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; - Selection of cigarette related items only. 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); - Exclusion of surveys without associated length; - Exclusion of surveys referring to the UNEP-MARLIN list: the UNEP-MARLIN protocol differs from the other types of monitoring in that cigarette butts are surveyed in a 10m square. To avoid comparing abundances from very different protocols, the choice has been made to distinguish in two maps the cigarette related items results associated with the UNEP-MARLIN list from the others; - Normalization of survey lengths to 100m & 1 survey / year: in some case, the survey length was not 100m, so in order to be able to compare the abundance of litter from different beaches a normalization is applied using this formula: Number of cigarette related items of the survey (normalized by 100 m) = Number of cigarette related items of the survey x (100 / survey length) Then, this normalized number of cigarette related items is summed to obtain the total normalized number of cigarette related items for each survey. Finally, the median abundance of cigarette related items for each beach and year is calculated from these normalized abundances of cigarette related items per survey. Percentiles 50, 75, 95 & 99 have been calculated taking into account cigarette related items from other sources data (excluding UNEP-MARLIN protocol) for all years. 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.

This visualization product displays the fishing & aquaculture related plastic items abundance of marine macro-litter (> 2.5cm) per beach per year from Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) monitoring surveys. 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 MSFD surveys only (exclusion of other monitoring, cleaning and research operations); - Exclusion of beaches without coordinates; - Selection of fishing and aquaculture related plastic items only. 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). The selection was adapted to the Joint list of litter categories fishing gears identification and therefore contains some differences with the selection made for previously published versions of this product; - Normalization of survey lengths to 100m & 1 survey / year: in some case, the survey length was not exactly 100m, so in order to be able to compare the abundance of litter from different beaches a normalization is applied using this formula: Number of fishing & aquaculture related plastic items of the survey (normalized by 100 m) = Number of fishing & aquaculture related items of the survey x (100 / survey length) Then, this normalized number of fishing & aquaculture related plastic items is summed to obtain the total normalized number of fishing & aquaculture related plastic items for each survey. Finally, the median abundance of fishing & aquaculture related plastic items for each beach and year is calculated from these normalized abundances of fishing & aquaculture related items per survey. Sometimes the survey length was null or equal to 0. Assuming that the MSFD protocol has been applied, the length has been set at 100m in these cases. Percentiles 50, 75, 95 & 99 have been calculated taking into account fishing & aquaculture related plastic items from MSFD data for all years. 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.