Assessing the impacts of heli-skiing on the behaviour and spatial distribution of Mountain Cariboo (Rangifer tarandus caribou)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Mountain caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) are listed as endangered in Canada, with isolated subherds only remaining in British Columbia and parts of northern Idaho. A loss of old-growth forest habitat has caused a decline in their range, making them more likely to be disturbed by backcountry recreational activities such as heli-skiing. This study investigated whether an interaction between heli-skiing and Mountain Caribou could be detected. The detectability of caribou from helicopters indicated that caribou are often not detected when within close proximity to active skiing. Data on the behavioural responses of caribou that were recorded by Mike Wiegele heli-skiing personnel between 1996 and 2010 were analysed. The relationship between the type of responses and the frequency of ski run usage was examined. Responses were not higher in areas subject to more frequent skiing, but overt behavioural responses to heliskiing were documented. Three GIS analyses were performed on GPS data from 25 caribou collared between 1996 and 2007 to determine any spatial effects of skiing activity on how animals use their range. The first test examined habitat use near ski runs. Actual numbers of GPS locations within suitable habitat near ski runs were more than expected. The second test determined the distance established by caribou between themselves and ski runs with different intensities of use. More than an expected number of locations were found close to frequently skied runs; while fewer than expected locations were found close to runs not skied. The third test compared caribou’s rate of movement within zones skied frequently and less often. There was no significant difference in the degree of movement in areas skied heavily or not. Results of these analyses suggest that caribou in the area were not directly displaced by heli-skiing activities during the years studied, but avoidance at finer scales than I measured is possible. It appears as if ‘Best Management Practices’ that enforce closing areas to skiing upon detection of caribou may be helpful in reducing conflicts with caribou; however, mountain caribou in this study area have likely habituated to more than 40 years of skiing. Continued avoidance management, more specific research on short-term reactions to heliskiing and with herds in other areas are suggested to ensure a coexistence of caribou and heli-skiing.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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) | 0,001 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».