This feature delineates forest and vegetation stands in the Yukon at a scale of 1: 40 ,000. It is a management level forest inventory (as opposed to a n operational level) - meaning that analysis and mapping are most effective close to the 1:40,000 scale and not larger . This inventory has been completed in various stages : delineation from hardcopy black and white photographs took place from 1987 to 2002; while recent data collection has proceeded through a digital (aka 'softcopy') methodology of scanned photographs and digital elevation models.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)

Ecodivisions are areas of broad climatic and physiographic uniformity, defined at the continental level.

Ecodomains are areas broad climatic uniformity, defined at the global level

Broad Ecosystem Units were mapped using predictive modeling methods from various data sources (ranging from 1:50,000 to 1:250,000 in scale) and are referenced to the CanVec digital spatial framework (1:50,000). Broad Ecosystem Units (BEU) are a level in the Yukon bioclimate ecosystem classification system that represents areas with similar broad vegetation communities, terrain type (soils and topography) within bioclimate zones. Broad Ecosystem Units are described in the accompanying report "Regional Ecosystems of West-Central Yukon, Part 1: Ecosystem descriptions ".The intended application for mapped broad ecosystem units is 1:100,000 or smaller (1:100,000 - 1:250,000 scale) - interpretations derived from the map products should not be applied at more detailed scales, even though the resultant 30m raster map allows users to view results at more detailed resolutions. With new information, boundaries and designations of Broad Ecosystem Units can change. Updates to Broad Ecosystem Units occur only periodically. For the most current information, or if you have questions, please contact the Ecological and Landscape Classification Program (ELC@yukon.ca).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)

Pepin et al. (2014) stated that three nested spatial scales were identified as relevant for the development of ecosystem summaries and management plans: Bioregion, Ecosystem Production Unit (EPU), and Ecoregion. A bioregion is composed by one or more EPUs, while an EPU consists of a combination of ecoregions, which represent elements with different physical and biological characteristics based on the analytical criteria applied. Pepin et al. (2014) reported on the consolidation of data and analyses of ecoregion structure for the continental shelf areas from the Labrador Sea to the mid-Atlantic Bight and provided recommendations on the definition of EPUs in the NAFO Convention Area. The results of two K-means clustering analyses (one geographically constrained and one un-constrained) and expert knowledge (including and considering location of ecoregions, knowledge of the distribution of major marine resources and fish stocks, and geographic proximity for delineation/definition of potential management units) served as guides for evaluation by NAFO’s (North Atlantic Fisheries Organization) working group on ecosystem science and assessments (WG-ESA). The final consensus from the discussions identified eight (8) major EPUs that can serve as practical candidate management units (from the 50 m isobaths, where research vessel data were available, seaward to the 1500 m isobaths) that consist of the Labrador Shelf (NAFO subareas 2GH), the northeast Newfoundland Shelf (subareas 2J3K), the Grand Banks (subareas 3LNO), Flemish Cap (subarea 3M), the Scotian Shelf (subareas 4VnsWX), Georges Bank (parts of subareas 5Ze and 5Zw), the Gulf of Maine (subarea 5Y and part of 5Ze) and the mid-Atlantic Bight (part of subarea 5Zw and subareas 6ABC). Southern Newfoundland (subarea 3Ps) was not included in the original analysis because fall survey data were unavailable. However, it was later added as an EPU after additional analysis of the fish community structure and trends using survey data from the spring, which indicated that this area is heavily influenced by the surrounding EPUs (NAFO 2015).The proposed candidate management units correspond to the EPUs that define major areas within the bioregions which contain a reasonably well defined food web/production system. The working group noted that the consensus solution represents a compromise that aims to define management units based on the boundaries of existing NAFO subareas that are appropriate for estimation of ecosystem and fishery production. References: NAFO. 2015. Report of the 8th Meeting of the NAFO Scientific Council (SC) Working Group on Ecosystem Science and Assessment (WGESA). 17-26 November 2015, Dartmouth, Canada. NAFO SCS Doc. 15/19.Pepin, P., Higdon, J., Koen-Alonso, M., Fogarty, M., and N. Ollerhead. 2014. Application of ecoregion analysis to the identification of Ecosystem Production Units (EPUs) in the NAFO Convention Area. NAFO SCR Doc. 14/069.

The Atlantic Colonial Waterbird Monitoring database captures geo-referenced data collected under the Atlantic Region’s Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS) Colonial Seabird Monitoring program, and data collected under CWS’ waterfowl and protected areas programs. These programs collectively monitor 22 species of colonial waterbirds breeding in the Atlantic Region of the following groups: fulmars, shearwaters, storm-petrels, gannets, gulls, terns, alcids, eiders, herons and cormorants, with the primary outcome to update information on the distribution, status, and trends of waterbirds breeding in all four Atlantic provinces. Surveys are conducted using one of three platforms: aerial, boat, or ground. Aerial surveys provide the most cost-effective way of conducting a comprehensive population census of diurnal species visible from air, namely gulls (Herring, Great Black-backed, Ring-billed, Glaucous), Black-legged Kittiwakes, Northern Gannets, terns (Arctic, Common, Roseate, Caspian), cormorants (Greater, Double-crested), Black Guillemots, and Common Eiders.Aerial surveys are also effective in identifying new colonies and provide additional information on how to most effectively conduct boat and ground surveys. Boat and ground surveys are conducted at smaller geographic scales and are necessary to obtain complementary information on the species composition of colonies and correction factors to finalize gull, tern and eider estimates obtained from the aerial surveys. Ground and/or boat surveys are also necessary to conduct colony counts of cliff-nesting birds (murres and fulmars), crevice nesting birds (razorbills and guillemots) and burrow-nesting birds (puffins, storm-petrels, shearwaters). Raw data are captured using various survey methods, including:1) visual estimates, 2) direct counts of number of individuals or apparently occupied sites and/or photo counts, 3) sub-sampling the colony through plot counts and extrapolating the estimated occupied densities over the occupied area which in turn is estimated using a variety of geographic information system approaches (e.g., Wilhelm et al. 2015). Important outcomes for how data are used include informing marine spatial planning, emergency preparedness, impact assessment of various anthropogenic threats, and COSEWIC status assessment (e.g., COSEWIC 2020). Further, these data are regularly used internally or in collaboration with partners to form the basis of peer-reviewed publications on regional, national, and/or global population trends for target species (e.g., Langlois Lopez et al. 2022, Iles et al. 2025).This dataset represents a subset of data collected from surveys led by CWS spanning from 1910 to 2024 and summarized to present, at a given colony, the year and count of birds from the most recent survey, the year and maximum count of birds within the last 20 years (if available), and the year and maximum count of birds ever recorded. In addition, CWS works closely with a variety of partners (e.g., provincial, other federal departments, academic, not-for profit organizations) to supplement colonial waterbird data collected in the Atlantic Region. To request additional census or survey data, please contact CWS.COSEWIC. 2020. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Leach’s Storm-Petrel (Atlantic population) Oceanodroma leucorhoa in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. xii + 70 pp. (https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/species-risk-public-registry.html). Iles, D.T., S.E. Gutowsky, A.M. Calvert, S.I. Wilhelm, J.-F. Rail, A. Hedd, H.L. Major, A.C. Smith, and G.J. Robertson. 2025. Estimating regional trajectories and trends of seabirds from sparse and inconsistent colony counts: case studies from eastern Canada with Leach’s Storm-Petrel and Atlantic Puffin. Avian Conservation and Ecology 20(2):16. https://doi.org/10.5751/ACE-02931-200216Langlois Lopez, S., Bond, A.L., O’Hanlon, N.J., Wilson, J.M., Vitz, A., Mostello, C.S., Hamilton, F., Rail, J.-F., Welch, L., Boettcher, R., Wilhelm, S.I., Anker-Nilssen, T., Daunt, F., and Masden, E. 2022. Global population and conservation status of the Great Black-backed Gull Larus marinus. Bird Conservation International, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959270922000181Wilhelm, S.I., Mailhiot, J., Arany, J., Chardine, J.W., Robertson, G.J., and Ryan, P.C. 2015. Update and trends of three important seabird populations in the western North Atlantic using a geographic information system approach. Marine Ornithology 43: 211-222.

This dataset shows the boundaries of the province's six fire management zones that existed prior to 2014 in which most forest fires received the same type of response. These management zones were based on: * common forest and forest fire management objectives * land use * density of values at risk * fire load * forest ecology The 2014 Wildland Fire Management Strategy moved from a zone-based approach to one where each wildland fire is assessed and receives an appropriate response according to the circumstances and condition of the fire.

The objective of this project was to gather data to develop a model of the food web of the lower trophic levels of the nearshore area of the Beaufort Sea. Sampling took place from 2005 to 2008 using the CCGS Nahidik. The multidisciplinary character of the Nahidik program produced measurements of biology/ecology (primary production, phytoplankton, zooplankton, benthos, fish), chemical and physical oceanography, contaminants, geology and hydro acoustics. The data were collected in July and August of each year. The Nahidik program provided data to provide a baseline for future studies as well as an information source for environmental assessment.

Sexual reproduction is critical to the resilience of seagrass beds impacted by habitat degradation or environmental changes, as robust seed banks allow new shoots to establish each year. Reproductive strategies of seagrass beds range on a continuum from strictly annual to perennial, driven by local environmental conditions. We examined the reproductive dynamics of Zostera marina beds at six sites on the Atlantic coast of Canada to characterize how life history strategies are shaped by the surrounding environment. Sites were categorized as wave protected and wave exposed, where protected sites were warm, shallow, with little water movement and muddy sediments, and exposed sites were either shallow or deep, with cooler water and sandy sediments. While mixed life history strategies were evident at all sites, protected eelgrass beds exhibited both the highest and lowest sexual reproductive effort relative to exposed beds. These beds regularly experienced thermal stress, with higher temperature range and extended warm water events relative to exposed beds. The development of reproductive shoots were similar across sites with comparable Growing Degree-days at the beginning and end of anthesis, but the First Flowering Date was earlier at the protected warmer sites relative to exposed sites. With different reproductive shoot density among sites, seed production, seed retention, and seedling recruitment also varied strongly. Only one site, located in a warm, shallow and protected lagoon, contained a mixed life history population with a high reproductive effort (33.7%), strong seed bank, and high seedling establishment. However, a primarily perennial population with the lowest reproductive effort (0.5%) was identified at the warmest site, suggesting that conditions here could not support high sexual reproduction. Robustness of seed banks was strongly linked to reproductive shoot density, although the role of seed retention, germination and seedling survival require further investigation. Our study provides insights into one key aspect of seagrass resilience, and suggests that resilience assessments should include reproductive shoot density to inform their management and conservation.Cite this data: Vercaemer B. and Wong M. Reproductive ecology of Zostera marina L. (eelgrass) across varying environmental conditions. Published: May 2022. Coastal Ecosystems Science Division, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Dartmouth, N.S. https://open.canada.ca/data/en/dataset/56cfea6f-aeca-47ed-94ab-c519d9e63c91

Ecosection boundaries with percent protected, number of overlapping protected areas and other attributes added as a result of geoprocessing in the Protected Area System Overview (PASO) application. Protected area and park representation by ecosection provides a landscape context for natural resource planning processes such as; management plans, land use zoning, environmental risk assessment, landscape analysis, habitat supply, and management of high priority species. Ecosections are distinguished from each other by enduring characteristics such as minor physiographic and macroclimatic or oceanographic variations. For more information on ecosections and the Ecoregion Classification System see: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/ecology/ecoregions/index.html. For important warnings about using this data for spatial analysis see the Data Quality section of the metadata