Wild horse-based tourism as wildlife tourism: the wild horse as the other
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wild horses as the focus of tourism occupy a unique position. This is a consequence of their ambiguous status in the natural and cultural landscape, particularly in North America. Wild horses are ecological agents, cultural icons, economic factors and political pawns. The complexity of their management environment has an impact on the tourism and recreational context. Focusing on the western US and western Canada, this article explores a conceptual framework for wild horse-based tourism and highlights unique characteristics of the encounter between wild horses and visitors, drawing on literature and empirical data. It positions wild horse-based tourism within a framework of wildlife tourism and introduces the wild horse as a charismatic animal which elicits strong reactions from visitors who encounter it. While visitors tend to embrace the wild horse as an integral part of its habitat, as a symbol of the western frontier, and an embodiment of freedom, the animal remains an extremely polarising subject in the management debate of public lands in the USA and Canada. The wild horse's beleaguered status in both countries seriously interferes with the realisation of the true potential of wild horse-based tourism. On the other hand, wild horse supporters pin high hopes on this industry's transformative power.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".