“It’s Hard Enough to Control Yourself; It’s Ridiculous to Think You Can Control Animals.” Competing Views on “The Bush” in Contemporary Yukon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aboriginal Athapaskan ( Dineh ) conceptions of the and its occupation by other-than-human persons—and the nature of proper relations between human persons and the bush and its occupants—stand in vivid contrast to Euro-Canadian views of the wilderness and its natural resources. Because of these distinctive perceptions, misunderstandings arise in the arena of management, which is a provision under the Umbrella Final Agreement (UFA) on Aboriginal land claims, signed by the Council of Yukon First Nations and the governments of Yukon and Canada. Alternating between Dineh and western academic perspectives, in this article I examine the competing discourse that has arisen in the Yukon during efforts to implement joint provisions of the UFA, using the Yukon Fish and Wildlife Management Board’s consideration of the issue of catch and release in recreational fishing. Due to a variety of cross-cultural factors, including different orientations to the notions of personhood, power, consensus, and embedded colonial relations, the current structure and implementation of management is, in practice, contrary to one of the over-arching goals of the UFA: that of the wish to recognize and protect a way of life that is based on an economic and spiritual relationship between Yukon Indian People and the land.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".