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.

The assessment of the status of eelgrass (Zostera marina) beds at the bay-scale in turbid, shallow estuaries is problematic. The bay-scale assessment (i.e., tens of km) of eelgrass beds usually involves remote sensing methods such as aerial photography or satellite imagery. These methods can fail if the water column is turbid, as is the case for many shallow estuaries on Canada’s eastern seaboard. A novel towfish package was developed for the bay-scale assessment of eelgrass beds irrespective of water column turbidity. The towfish consisted of an underwater video camera with scaling lasers, sidescan sonar and a transponder-based positioning system. The towfish was deployed along predetermined transects in three northern New Brunswick estuaries. Maps were created of eelgrass cover and health (epiphyte load) and ancillary bottom features such as benthic algal growth, bacterial mats (Beggiatoa) and oysters. All three estuaries had accumulations of material reminiscent of the oomycete Leptomitus, although it was not positively identified in our study. Tabusintac held the most extensive eelgrass beds of the best health. Cocagne had the lowest scores for eelgrass health, while Bouctouche was slightly better. The towfish method proved to be cost effective and useful for the bay-scale assessment of eelgrass beds to sub-meter precision in real time. Cite this data as: Vandermeulen H. Data of: Bay Scale Assessment of Eelgrass Beds Using Sidescan and Video - Bouctouche. Published: November 2017. Coastal Ecosystems Science Division, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, N.S. https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/b4c83cd2-20f2-47d8-8614-08c1c44c9d8c

This gridded product visualizes 1960 - 2014 water body dissolved oxygen concentration (umol/l) in the North Sea domain, for each season (winter: December – February; spring: March – May; summer: June – August; autumn: September – November). It is produced as a Diva 4D analysis, version 4.6.11: a reference field of all seasonal data between 1960-2014 was used; results were logit transformed to avoid negative/underestimated values in the interpolated results; error threshold masks L1 (0.3) and L2 (0.5) are included as well as the unmasked field. Every step of the time dimension corresponds to a 10-year moving average for each season. The depth dimension allows visualizing the gridded field at various depths.

EMODnet Chemistry aims to provide access to marine chemistry data sets and derived data products concerning eutrophication, acidity and contaminants. The chemicals chosen reflect importance to the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). ITS-90 water temperature and Water body salinity variables have been also included (as-is) to complete the Eutrophication and Acidity data. If you use these variables for calculations, please refer to SeaDataNet for having the quality flags: https://www.seadatanet.org/Products/Aggregated-datasets . This aggregated dataset contains all unrestricted EMODnet Chemistry data on Eutrophication and Acidity (14 parameters with quality flag indicators), and covers the North Sea with 587584 CDI records. Data were aggregated and quality controlled by 'Aarhus University, Department of Bioscience, Marine Ecology Roskilde' from Denmark. Regional datasets concerning eutrophication and acidity are automatically harvested and resulting collections are aggregated and quality controlled using ODV Software and following a common methodology for all Sea Regions ( https://doi.org/10.6092/9f75ad8a-ca32-4a72-bf69-167119b2cc12). When not present in original data, Water body nitrate plus nitrite was calculated by summing up the Nitrates and Nitrites. Same procedure was applied for Water body dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) which was calculated by summing up the Nitrates, Nitrites and Ammonium. Quality flags for Water body dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN) should be disregarded since that currently they are not based on the original quality flags of nitrite, nitrate and ammonium. Parameter names are based on P35, EMODnet Chemistry aggregated parameter names vocabulary, which is available at: https://www.bodc.ac.uk/resources/vocabularies/vocabulary_search/P35/. Detailed documentation is available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.6092/4e85717a-a2c9-454d-ba0d-30b89f742713 Explore and extract data at: https://emodnet-chemistry.webodv.awi.de/eutrophication>NorthSea The aggregated dataset can be downloaded as ODV collection and spreadsheet, which is composed of metadata header followed by tab separated values. This spreadsheet can be imported to ODV Software for visualisation (More information can be found at: http://www.seadatanet.org/Standards-Software/Software/ODV). The original datasets can be searched and downloaded from EMODnet Chemistry Chemistry CDI Data and Discovery Access Service: https://emodnet-chemistry.maris.nl/search

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

This product displays for Cadmium, positions with percentages of all available data values per group of animals that are present in EMODnet regional contaminants aggregated datasets, v2024. The product displays positions for all available years.

The Oceans Act (1997) commits Canada to maintaining biological diversity and productivity in the marine environment. A key component of this is to identify areas that are considered ecologically or biologically significant. Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) Science has developed guidance on the identification of Ecologically or Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) (DFO 2004) and has endorsed the scientific criteria of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) for identifying ecologically or biologically significant marine areas as defined in Annex I of Decision IX/20 of its 9th Conference of Parties. These criteria were applied to the Newfoundland and Labrador (NL) Shelves Bioregion in two separate data-driven processes. The first process focused on the area north of the Placentia Bay-Grand Banks (PBGB) Large Ocean Management Area (LOMA) (DFO 2013). The second process focused on the PBGB area (DFO 2019), where EBSAs had previously been identified using a more Delphic approach (Templeman 2007). In both cases, an EBSA Steering Committee, comprised of experts in oceanography, ecosystem structure and function, taxa-specific life histories and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) guided the process by advising or aiding in the identification, collection, processing and analysis of data layers, as well as participating in the final selection of candidate EBSAs (Wells et al. 2017, Ollerhead et al. 2017, Wells et al. 2019). All information was compiled in a GIS and a hierarchical approach was used to review individual data layers and groupings of data layers. Peer review meetings were held for both processes, during which candidate EBSAs were reviewed and the final EBSAs were agreed upon and delineated. In the northern study area, a total of fifteen EBSAs were identified and described; three of these areas are primarily coastal areas; seven are in offshore areas; four EBSAs straddle coastal and offshore areas; and one is a transitory EBSA that follows the southern extent of pack ice. In the PBGB study area, fourteen EBSAs were identified in two different categories: seven based on coastal data and seven based on offshore data. In comparing the new PBGB EBSAs to those identified in 2007, nine of them overlap spatially and are based on similar features; however, there were some variations in the boundaries. Two of the EBSAs that were identified in 2007 were no longer considered EBSAs in 2017, but portions of both of these areas were captured in part by other EBSAs. Five new EBSAs were identified in areas not previously considered. References: DFO, 2004. Identification of Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Ecosystem Status Rep. 2004/006. DFO. 2013. Identification of additional Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) within the Newfoundland and Labrador Shelves Bioregion. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Advis. Rep. 2013/048. DFO. 2019. Re-evaluation of the Placentia Bay-Grand Banks Area to Identify Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas . DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Sci. Advis. Rep. 2019/040. Ollerhead, L.M.N., Gullage, M., Trip, N., and Wells, N. 2017. Development of Spatially Referenced Data Layers for Use in the Identification and Delineation of Candidate Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas in the Newfoundland and Labrador Shelves Bioregion. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2017/036. v + 38 p Templeman, N.D. 2007. Placentia Bay-Grand Banks Large Ocean Management Area Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas. Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2007/052: iii + 15 p. Wells, N.J., Stenson, G.B., Pepin, P., and Koen-Alonso, M. 2017. Identification and Descriptions of Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas in the Newfoundland and Labrador Shelves Bioregion. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2017/013. v + 87 p. Wells, N., K. Tucker, K. Allard, M. Warren, S. Olson, L. Gullage, C. Pretty, V. Sutton-Pande and K. Clarke. 2019. Re-evaluation of the Placentia Bay-Grand Banks Area of the Newfoundland and Labrador Shelves Bioregion to Identify and Describe Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2019/049. viii + 138 p.

This product displays for Mercury, positions with values counts that have been measured per matrix for each year and are present in EMODnet regional contaminants aggregated datasets, v2024. The product displays positions for every available year.

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.

This visualization product displays the total abundance of marine macro-litter (> 2.5cm) per beach, per 100m & to 1 survey aggregated over the period 2001 to 2020 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 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 MSFD surveys only (exclusion of other 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 (total abundance list). This list was created using EU Marine Beach Litter Baselines and EU Threshold Value for Macro Litter on Coastlines from JRC (these two documents are attached to this metadata); - Normalization of survey lengths to 100m & 1 survey / year: in some cases, 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 items (normalized by 100 m) = Number of litter per items x (100 / survey length) Then, this normalized number of items is summed to obtain the total normalized number of litter for each survey. Finally, a median is calculated over the entire period among all these total numbers of litter per 100m calculated for each 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. The size of each circle on this map increases with the calculated median number of marine litter per beach, per 100m & to 1 survey. The median litter abundance values displayed in the legend correspond to the 50 and 99 percentiles and the maximum value. 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. - This map was created to give an idea of the distribution of beach litter between 2001 and 2021 in a synthetic manner. NOT ALL BEACHES MAY HAVE DATA FOR THE ENTIRE PERIOD, SO IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO MAKE A COMPARISON BETWEEN BEACHES.