Competitive Fishing in Freshwaters of North America
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A survey of competitive fishing activities in Canadian and U. S. jurisdictions was conducted during the summer-autumn of 2000 and the winter of 2001. Responses to a survey involving 10 questions were received from all 62 state, provincial, and territorial agencies contacted. Respondents reported 19,371 events and we estimate that over 25,000 competitive fishing events were held in 2000. Several social and biological issues associated with competitive fishing activities were reported. Social issues included congestion at access points, safety concerns, and conflicts with non-tournament anglers. Biological issues included increased fishing pressure, initial and delayed mortality, impacts of fish relocation, and the potential transfer of exotic species. There has been an increase in the development of policies and regulations associated with competitive fishing since the last survey was conducted in 1989 and it appears that more are being planned for the future. Approximately one-half of all North American jurisdictions now have a requirement to obtain a permit for an organized competitive fishing event. Research is needed to address potential impacts and to develop best management practices for competitive fishing activities.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it