MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2306698310 · doi:10.14288/1.0102434

A critical analysis of the water legislation of the province of British Columbia

2012· article· en· W2306698310 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Melvin Jack Shelley

Notice bibliographique

RevuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueEnvironmental law and policy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLegislationGeographyPolitical scienceLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Water is a key natural resource in our way of life. Without water such miracles of human achievement as the building of great cities and the spanning of the continent with railroads and automobile highways would not have been possible. Such a key natural resource must be protected and controlled by adequate legislation which will prevent its waste, undue consumption, misuse or contamination. With this view in mind the writer has critically analysed the legislation governing water distribution and sewage-disposal control in British Columbia by comparing it with that in other provinces, the United States of America, and Italy. To achieve this critical analysis, the writer has used two excellent references on which to base his recommendations in the form of desirable principles for the existing British Columbia water legislation. These two references are entitled, "Desirable Principles of State Water Legislation," and "Suggested State Water Pollution Control Act," and are published by the National Reclamation Association and the United States Public Health Service, respectively. As a result of the critical analysis of the existing British Columbia water supply and distribution legislation, it is felt that the British Columbia Act Respecting the Diversion and Use of Water has both sound legislative foundations and administrative procedure, and is far superior to any of the similar pieces of legislation of the other provinces in Canada. The writer also feels that the Act ranks high in comparison with the water acts of comparable western states in the United States. However, there are certain recommendations for improvement that have been made for the British Columbia water supply and distribution legislation. Briefly, these are as follows: 1. That some provision be made for the acquiring, controlling, and exercising of rights to the use of ground waters, including both definite underground streams and percolating waters. 2. That some provision be made for an appropriator to have the opportunity of recapturing and re-using return water which results from his development when he is diligent and uses foresight in his attempt not to infringe upon preexisting rights. 3. That some provision be made for the appropriation of salvaged water and developed water in preparation for any foreseeable shortage of our natural water resources. 4. That some provision be made for the rotation in use of water in the event of an unexpected shortage of water for domestic or other purposes. 5. That some provision be made for the exchange of water so that appropriators may exchange water with one another so long as the rights of others are not impaired with respect to either quantity or quality of the water, and so bring about a more effective utilization of water by appropriators who are already entitled to divert under terms of their separate appropriative rights. 6. That some provision be made for the appropriation of interprovincial waters with the use of a doctrine of reciprocity. As a result of the critical analysis of the existing British Columbia water-pollution control legislation, it is felt that, in the past, the authority has been divided among several agencies, a situation which gave rise to lax control and a lack of coordination. However, the recently-passed Act (March 1956) to Control the Pollution of Waters of the Province is an excellent beginning of effective, coordinated control. It is difficult to compare this Act with those in other provinces or in the United States because of its recent enactment. Briefly, the writer would suggest the following recommendations: 1. That some definite and exact classification be adopted in setting the quality standards of beneficial uses for receiving waters, and that these standards be inserted in the Pollution-control Act. 2. That the beneficial uses of the receiving water be evaluated, and that discharges into the receiving water be controlled so as to protect as many of the benefits as possible. 3. That some provision be made for setting up regional boards, in whose hands will be the primary control. 4. That the Provincial Pollution-control Board be given power to hold an inquiry, and for that purpose it be given all the powers and jurisdiction of a Justice of the Peace under the "Summary Convictions Act." 5. That the Board be given the power to require the keeping of records and making of reports, and to enter on property at reasonable times for purposes of inspection and investigation. 6. That one member of the Board be experienced in the field of municipal government and one be experienced in the field of industrial activities.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,171
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,962

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,018
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0070,007
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0250,007
Communication savante0,0110,001
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,008
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,008
Tête enseignante GPT0,205
Écart entre enseignants0,197 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Même sujetEnvironmental law and policyTravaux en français237 207