MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1495505360

Migratory Bird HuntingActivity and HarvestDuring the 2007 and 2008Hunting Seasons

2009· article· en· W1495505360 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert V. Raftovich, Khristi Wilkins, Sheri S. Williams, Howard L. Spriggs

Bibliographic record

VenueLincoln (University of Nebraska) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAvian ecology and behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

National surveys of migratory bird hunters were conducted during the 2009 and 2010 hunting seasons. Hunters of the following types of migratory birds were surveyed: waterfowl (family Anatidae), doves (mourning [Zenaida macroura] and white-winged [Z. asiatica]), bandtailed pigeon (Patagioenas fasciata), American woodcock (Scolopax minor), Wilson’s snipe (Gallinago delicata), American coot (Fulica americana), gallinules (Common moorhen [Gallinula chloropus] and purple gallinule [Porzana carolina]), and rails (king rail [Rallus elegans], clapper rail [R. longirostris], Virginia rail [R. limicola], and sora [Coturnicops noveboracensis]). About 1.1 million waterfowl hunters harvested 13,139,800 (±4%) ducks and 3,327,000 (±5%) geese in 2009, and about 1.1 million waterfowl hunters harvested 14,796,700 (±4%) ducks and 3,169,900 (±5%) geese in 2010. Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), green-winged teal (A. crecca), gadwall (A. strepera), blue-winged/cinnamon teal (A. discors), and wood duck (Aix sponsa) were the 5 most-harvested duck species in the U.S., and Canada goose (Branta canadensis) was the predominant species in the goose harvest. About 974,400 dove hunters harvested 17,354,800 (±6%) mourning doves in 2009 and 959,900 hunters harvested 17,230,400 ± 5% in 2010. Woodcock hunters numbered about 109,000 in 2009 and 138,300 in 2010, and harvested 238,400 (±15%) birds in 2009 and 332,900 (±11%) in 2010. About 29,400 people hunted snipe in 2009 and 37,500 in 2010, and they harvested 83,500 (±45%) and 118,200 (±37%) snipe in 2009 and 2010, respectively. Coot hunters (about 31,100 in 2009 and 50,500 in 2010) harvested 219,000 (±34%) coots in 2009 and 302,600 (±50%) in 2010. Gallinule hunters (about 2,300 in 2009 and 15,000 in 2010) harvested 7,400 (±66%) gallinules in 2009 and 13,700 (±87%) in 2010. About 7,800 rail hunters harvested 36,100 (±62%) rails in 2009 and 17,000 rail hunters harvested 27,100 (±57%) rails in 2010.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.167 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLincoln (University of Nebraska)Same topicAvian ecology and behaviorFrench-language works237,207