These data sets provide information pertaining to shrimp and bycatch estimates associated with beam-trawling and trapping (2001-2002) in Clio Channel. Data sets were compiled and formatted by Meagan Mak.Abstract from report:As part of a project investigating possible modification of marine ecosystems by shrimp trawling and trapping, we enumerated beam trawl and prawn trap catches at two locations in Clio Channel, south -central coast of British Columbia. Beam trawl surveys were conducted in Bones Bay and Turnour Bay during October 2001 and January 2002, respectively, and a prawn trap survey was conducted in Turnour Bay during March 2002. Catch data from the two gear types are presented.

This theme includes the drainage areas of various watercourse monitoring stations (physicochemical and bacteriological, benthic organisms, diatoms, pesticides, etc.) carried out by the Ministry of the Environment, the Fight against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks (MELCCFP) as well as lake catchments (MELCCFP) as well as lake catchments including the majority of lakes in the Voluntary Lake Monitoring Network (RSVL).The drainage area and the watershed represent the territory whose water flows to the sampling station or to the outlet of the lake. Boundaries are generated using a geographic information system (GIS) from topographic maps, numerical elevation models and flow models, and watershed boundaries produced by the Main Directorate of Water Expertise (DPEH).The drainage area and watershed are used to calculate the area drained upstream of the sampling station or lake, to characterize the drained territory (for example, to determine land use), and to meet specific mapping needs. The linked tables also provide compilations of land use according to three classifications to contextualize the various monitoring carried out at the stations. Note that the use of land outside Quebec, drainage areas and transboundary watersheds is not calculated and that the percentages in each category correspond to the Quebec area only.**This third party metadata element was translated using an automated translation tool (Amazon Translate).**

Registered Trapping Concessions (RTCs) are legal boundaries that define an area where the holder of the concession has the exclusive right to trap furbearing animals. Because trapping is done primarily along waterways, RTCs are often defined by watersheds, using height of land (ridges and mountain peaks) as their boundaries. This is the opposite of GMAs which are defined by mountains. Sometimes RTCs are grouped together to form a Group Trapping Concession (in which groups of individual share the right to trap). This may or may not involve the elimination of the component RTC boundaries. The Yukon has 360 RTCs and 13 Group Trapping Concessions. Only Kluane National Park, Kluane Wildlife Sanctuary, and Ddhaw Ghro Habitat Protection are are not covered by RTCs. This data was built using the 1:250,000 National Topographic Data Base (NTDB) as the digitizing base.Distributed from [GeoYukon](https://yukon.ca/geoyukon) by the [Government of Yukon](https://yukon.ca/maps) . Discover more digital map data and interactive maps from Yukon's digital map data collection.For more information: [geomatics.help@yukon.ca](mailto:geomatics.help@yukon.ca)

Sealion rafting areas. CRIMS is a legacy dataset of BC coastal resource data that was acquired in a systematic and synoptic manner from 1979 and was intermittently updated throughout the years. Resource information was collected in nine study areas using a peer-reviewed provincial Resource Information Standards Committee consisting of DFO Fishery Officers, First Nations, and other subject matter experts. There are currently no plans to update this legacy data.

Displays the levels of escalating enforcement applied by health officers to enforce the Manitoba Food and Food Handling Establishment Regulations when food safety violations are not corrected in the prescribed period of timeThis table displays the frequency in which health officers applied escalating levels of enforcement to food processors who did not correct food safety violations in the prescribed amount of time indicated in the inspection. Food processors are given a period of time to correct food safety violations based on the associated risk to food safety. Escalating enforcement is only applied if the violation is not corrected in the prescribed period of time. This table was created by the Food Safety and Inspection Branch - Agriculture and Resource Development department.Field Names (Field Alias): Field description. Period (Period):The period for which the data was collected. Either quarterly or yearly. Year (Year): The specific year of the previously mentioned data collection period. Date (Date): The dates of the calendar year in which the data was collected during a period. Enforcement_Type (Enforcement Type): The individual levels of escalating enforcement applied by health officers. The values for this field are "Warning letter", "Verbal warning", "Offence notice issued", "Closure orders issued", "Suspensions", "Products seized and destroyed", "Products seized and held". Total (Total): the number of occurrences a level of escalating enforcement was applied in a period.

The spatial representation for a Public Sustained Yield Unit, which is an area of Crown land, usually a natural topographic unit determined by drainage areas, managed for sustained yield by the Crown through the Ministry of Forests. It includes all Crown lands within the currently established boundaries of the unit and excludes federal lands, provincial parks, experimental forest reserves, gazetted watersheds and tree farm licences. Crown land designated as a public sustained yield unit under Section 6 of the Forest Act. A portion of a TSA

This dataset represents abundance data of commercial size Sea Scallop (Placopecten magellanicus; ≥ 80 mm shell height) from 2011-2023 from the Bay of Fundy Inshore Scallop Survey. Data is binned into 5-mm shell height bins, is prorated to an 800 m tow length and 17.5 feet (5.334 m) drag width (i.e., representing an area swept of 4267 m2), and was collected using unlined dredge gear. Each row represents a tow and contains information such as tow date, cruise name, gear type, geographical coordinates (decimal degrees, WGS 84) and the Scallop Production Area in which the tow took place. Survey protocols are documented in Glass (2017). This dataset contains tow data from a comparative survey conducted in 2012 (Smith et al., 2013). Further, these data correspond to the publication of Hebert et al. (2025).ReferencesGlass, A. 2017. Maritimes Region Inshore Scallop Assessment Survey: Detailed Technical Description. Can. Tech. Rep. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 3231: v + 32 p.Hebert, N, Sameoto, J.A., Keith, D.M., Murphy, O.A., Brown, C.J., Flemming, J. 2025. Interannual variability in the length–weight relationship can disrupt the abundance–biomass correlation of sea scallop (Placopecten magellanicus). ICES. J. Mar. Sci. Smith, S.J., Glass, A., Sameoto. J., Hubley, B., Reeves, A., and Nasmith, L. 2013. Comparative survey between Digby and Miracle drag gear for scallop surveys in the Bay of Fundy. DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. 2012/161. iv + 20 p.Cite this data as: Sameoto, J.A. Data of: Bay of Fundy Sea Scallop Commercial Size Abundance Data. Published: December 2025. Population Ecology Science Division, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, N.S. https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/ecc09d98-56ed-4a27-ad62-5c3714a1d9b4

The spatial representation for a Forest Deletion, which is any Forest land that is to be removed from the land designated by the Lieutenant Governor into an established forest

The spatial representation for a Tree Farm Licence Deletion, which is forest land within the Tree Farm Licence that is being removed from the Tree Farm Licence Schedule 'A' or 'B' For further information on Tree Farm Licenses please visit this website: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content?id=A93E6DFD8C164AD19CD17880450289A3

Marine Protected Areas require comprehensive monitoring to ensure objectives are achieved; however, monitoring natural ecosystems at scale is challenged by the biodiversity it aims to measure. Environmental DNA (eDNA) metabarcoding holds promise to address this monitoring challenge. We conducted paired sampling at 54 sites for fish and invertebrate assemblages in the Northwest Atlantic using groundfish trawls and eDNA metabarcoding of benthic seawater using four genetic markers (12S rRNA, 16S rRNA, 18S rRNA, and CO1). Compared to trawling, eDNA detected similar patterns of species turnover, larger estimates of gamma diversity, and smaller estimates of alpha diversity. A total of 63.6% (42/66) of fish species captured by trawling were detected by eDNA, along with an additional 26 species. Of the 24 missed detections by eDNA, 12 were inevitable as they lacked reference sequences. Excluding taxa assigned to higher than species level and those without a species name, 23.6% (17/72) of invertebrate species captured by trawling were detected by CO1, which detected an additional 98 species. We demonstrate that eDNA is capable of detecting patterns of community assemblage and species turnover in an offshore environment, emphasizing its strong potential for a non-invasive, comprehensive, and scalable tool for biodiversity monitoring supporting marine conservation programmes.Cite this data as: Jeffery, N., Rubidge, E., Abbott, C., Westfall, K., Stanley, R. (2024): Data of: eDNA metabarcoding enriches traditional trawl survey data for monitoring biodiversity in the marine environment.Published: August 2024. Coastal Ecosystems Science Division, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, N.S. https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/43a91ba7-8025-4330-88db-db14022d729d