Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The Hunting Fishing and Trapping Co-ordinating Committee (HFTCC), created at the signature of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement has been meeting regularly since 1977. Early in the process, it became clear that the perception of the role and powers of the Committee were not commonly shared by the native and non-native members of the Committee. Nevertheless, the Committee has been used primarily as a consultative body for wildlife related issues. Of all the files on which the Committee worked, Caribou management, (including the development of outfitting and commercial hunting for this species) has been among one of the most discussed subjects during the meetings. An analysis of important decisions taken and of the process that led to them reveal that very rarely was the Committee able to formulate unanimous resolutions to the Governments concerning caribou management. In fact, only a few unanimous resolutions could be traced and many were ignored. This took place during a period of abundance and growth of the caribou herds. As a result, the Committee has gone through the cycle of growth of the George River Herd without a management plan, without a long term outfitting management plan and for the last 8 years, without a population estimate of the herds. This situation did not prevent the Committee from allocating quotas for a commercial hunt, open a winter sport hunt and to give permanent status to outfitting camps that were once established as mobile camps. It was hoped then that increased harvest would help maintain the population at carrying capacity. This short-term reaction however, never evolved into a more elaborate plan. Of course this must be looked at in the context of the HFTCC having a lot more to worry about than the Caribou. Although all members know of the population cycles of caribou, the decision process that must be triggered, should a crisis occur is not in place. This presently results into a polarization of concerned users (fall outfitters vs. winter outfitters, subsistence and sport hunters vs. commercial hunt, Outfitters Associations vs. HFTCC and eventually George River Herd users vs. Leaf River Herd users. The HFTCC may have to make difficult decisions during the coming years but did not gain much constructive experience through its first 25 years of existence. It is unfortunate that the authority of the Committee is binding the governments only in times of crisis when an upper limit of kill needs to be established. Because of the unpredictability of caribou herd numbers, the upper limit of kill should be established on a yearly basis. This would insure that the committee is fed information continuously in order to make informed decisions and would also re-establish the authority of the HFTCC over this resource.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».