These structure, isopach and zero edge files are part of a series of stratigraphic framework maps for the Saskatchewan Phanerozoic Fluids and Petroleum Systems (SPFPS) project.The series of stratigraphic framework maps for the Saskatchewan Phanerozoic Fluids and Petroleum Systems (SPFPS) project have been produced using 2 km equi-spaced modified grids generated from Golden Software’s Surfer 9 kriging algorithm. The dataset used to produce each of the maps in this series was created using data from several projects completed by the Ministry (Christopher, 2003; Saskatchewan Industry and Resources et al., 2004; Kreis et al., 2004; Marsh and Heinemann, 2006; Saskatchewan Ministry of Energy and Resources et al., 2007; Heinemann and Marsh, 2009); these data were validated and edited as required to facilitate correlations between the various regional projects. In addition, to minimize edge effects during contouring, the senior author also generated stratigraphic data from wells in adjacent jurisdictions.

This map service provides access to the Chronology dataset shown on the GeoAtlas application.**Please Note – All published Saskatchewan Geological Survey datasets, including those available through the Saskatchewan Mining and Petroleum GeoAtlas, are sourced from the Enterprise GIS Data Warehouse. They are therefore identical and share the same refresh schedule. This dataset represents the chronology for the Province of Saskatchewan at 1:1 million scale. It is a regional distribution of bedrock categorized by age into Archean, Archean or Proterozoic, Proterozoic, Helikian, Ordovician, Silurian, Devonian, Cretaceous, and Tertiary for the province of Saskatchewan, Canada. Mapping in support of this dataset was over many years of compiling bedrock data and integrating into this product. The data was created as a file geodatabase feature class and output for public distribution.

* This dataset is updated on a daily basis. The ‘Record Modified’ date refers to the last metadata update.This dataset contains the extent of mineral claims held in Nunavut. A mineral claim is an area of Crown Land that is selected using the Nunavut Map Selection system by an individual or mineral exploration company that holds a valid licence to prospect. This grants the individual or mineral exploration company the mineral rights to the recorded area as provided for under the Nunavut Mining Regulations, SOR/2014-69. If the holder of a mineral claim wishes to produce minerals from the claim, or to hold it for more than thirty years, the holder must apply for a lease of the claim. This digital coverage provides a record and tracking mechanism for mining exploration in Nunavut.For more information, visit https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100036000/1547749889500. Note: This is one of the four (4) datasets that describe mineral tenure in Nunavut. It includes mineral claims, mining leases, prospecting permits as well as coal exploration licences.

The Town dataset is comprised of all the polygons that represent Towns in Alberta. Town is a municipality type defined under the authority of the Municipal Government Act. The formation of a Town can occur if a majority of buildings are on parcels of land smaller than 1850 square metres and there is a population of 1000 or more.

1:50,000 NTDB Cultural Point Features Based on Edition 2.x.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)

A tribal council is a grouping of First Nations with common interests who voluntarily joined together to provide services to member First Nations.The tribal council geographic location dataset contains the geographic location of all tribal councils in Canada as points as well as basic attributes data. Each tribal council point represents its address as it is registered in Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) Indian Government Support System (IGSS). A connection with the IGSS is in place to ensure that any update to the system is reflected in the attributes data associated with the geography of each tribal council. This dataset is Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) official source for Tribal Councils geographic location on maps.

* This dataset is updated on a daily basis. The ‘Record Modified’ date refers to the last metadata update.This dataset contains the extent of mineral leases in Nunavut. A mineral lease is a mineral claim that has been surveyed by a Canada Lands Surveyor. A mineral lease can be applied for after an exploration prospecting company has done a minimum of representation work in the claim area and if a legal survey on the claim has been recorded. A mineral lease is required for disposal or sale of minerals or of a gross value of more than $100,000 in one year.For more information, visit https://www.rcaanc-cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1100100036000/1547749889500. Note: This is one of the four (4) datasets that describe mineral tenure in Nunavut. It includes mineral claims, mining leases, prospecting permits as well as coal exploration licences.

The Village dataset is comprised of all the polygons that represent Villages in Alberta. Village is a municipality type defined under the authority of the Municipal Government Act. The formation of a Village can occur when a majority of the buildings are on parcels of land smaller than 1850 square meters and there is a population of 300 or more.

Across the Canadian North, Arctic Char, Salvelinus alpinus, are culturally important and critical for maintaining subsistence lifestyles and ensuring food security for Inuit. Arctic Char also support economic development initiatives in many Arctic communities through the establishment of coastal and inland commercial char fisheries. The Halokvik River, located near the community of Cambridge Bay, Nunavut, has supported a commercial fishery for anadromous Arctic Char since the late 1960s. The sustainable management of this fishery, however, remains challenging given the lack of biological data on Arctic Char from this system and the limited information on abundance and biomass needed for resolving sustainable rates of exploitation. In 2013 and 2014, we enumerated the upstream run of Arctic Char in this system using a weir normally used for commercial harvesting. Additionally, we measured fish length and used T-bar anchor tags to mark a subset of the run. Subsequently, we estimated population size using capture-mark-recapture (CMR) methods. The estimated number of Arctic Char differed substantially between years. In 2013, 1967 Arctic Char were enumerated whereas in 2014, 14,502 Arctic Char were enumerated. We attribute this marked difference primarily to differences in weir design between years. There was also no significant relationship between daily mean water temperature and number of Arctic Char counted per day in either year of the enumeration. The CMR population estimates of Arctic Char (those ≥450mm in length) for 2013 and 2014 were 35,546 (95% C.I 30,513-49,254) and 48,377 (95% C.I. 37,398-74,601) respectively. The 95% CI overlapped between years, suggesting that inter-annual differences may not be as extreme as what is suggested by the enumeration. The population estimates reported here are also the first estimates of population size for an Arctic Char stock in the Cambridge Bay region using CMR methodology. Overall, the results of this study will be valuable for understanding how population size may fluctuate over time in the region and for potentially providing advice on the sustainable rates of harvest for Halokvik River Arctic Char. Additionally, the results generated here may prove valuable for validating current stock assessment models that are being explored for estimating biomass and abundance for commercial stocks of Arctic Char in the region.

Catch, effort, location (latitude, longitude), relative abundance indices, and associated biological data from groundfish multi-species bottom trawl surveys in Strait of Georgia.IntroductionThe Strait of Georgia (SOG) synoptic bottom trawl survey was conducted in 2012 and 2015. This survey is one of a set of long-term and coordinated surveys that together cover the continental shelf and upper slope of most of the British Columbia coast. The other surveys are the Queen Charlotte Sound (QCS) survey, the Hecate Strait (HS) survey, the West Coast Vancouver Island (WCVI) survey and the West Coast Haida Gwaii (WCHG) survey. The survey was not impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The objectives of these surveys are to provide fishery independent abundance indices of all demersal fish species available to bottom trawling and to collect biological samples of selected species. The surveys follow a random depth-stratified design and the sampling units are 2 km by 2 km blocks. The synoptic bottom trawl surveys are conducted by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) in collaboration with the Canadian Groundfish Research and Conservation Society (CGRCS), a non-profit society composed of participants in the British Columbia commercial groundfish trawl fishery. The Queen Charlotte Sound and West Coast Haida Gwaii surveys are conducted under collaborative agreements, with the CGRCS providing chartered commercial fishing vessels and field technicians, while DFO provides in-kind contributions for running the surveys including personnel and equipment. The Hecate Strait, West Coast Vancouver Island, and Strait of Georgia surveys are conducted by DFO and have typically taken place on a Canadian Coast Guard research vessel. Until 2016 this vessel was the CCGS W.E. Ricker. From 2021 onwards, this vessel was the CCGS Sir John Franklin. In years when a coast guard vessel has not been available, the Hecate Strait, West Coast Vancouver Island, and Strait of Georgia surveys have taken place on chartered industry vessels. Data from these surveys are also presented in the groundfish data synopsis report (Anderson et al. 2019).EffortThis table contains information about the survey trips and fishing events (trawl tows/sets) that are part of this survey series. Trip-level information includes the year the survey took place, a unique trip identifier, the vessel that conducted the survey, and the trip start and end dates (the dates the vessel was away from the dock conducting the survey). Set-level information includes the date, time, location, and depth that fishing took place, as well as information that can be used to calculate fishing effort (duration) and swept area. All successful fishing events are included, regardless of what was caught.CatchThis table contains the catch information from successful fishing events. Catches are identified to species or to the lowest taxonomic level possible. Most catches are weighed, but some are too small (“trace” amounts) or too large (e.g. very large Big Skate). The unique trip identifier and set number are included so that catches can be related to the fishing event information (including capture location).BiologyThis table contains the available biological data for catches which were sampled. Data may include any or all of length, sex, weight, age. Different length types are measured depending on the species. Age structures are collected when possible for species where validated aging methods exist and are archived until required for an assessment; therefore, all existing structures have not been aged at this time. The unique trip identifier and set number are included so that samples can be related to the fishing event and catch information.BiomassThis table contains relative biomass indices of species that have been captured in every survey of the time series. The coefficient of variation and bootstrapped 95% confidence intervals are provided for each index. The groundfish data synopsis report (Anderson et al. 2019) provides an explanation of how the relative biomass indices are derived.