MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988114629 · doi:10.1111/fme.12005

Status of aboriginal, commercial and recreational inland fisheries in <scp>N</scp>orth <scp>A</scp>merica: past, present and future

2013· article· en· W1988114629 on OpenAlexafffund
Steven J. Cooke, Karen J. Murchie

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Management and Ecology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersCanada Research ChairsGoddard Space Flight CenterGreat Lakes Fishery Commission
KeywordsFisheryRecreational fishingBycatchRecreationTroutFisheries managementHabitatFish <Actinopterygii>BiologyGeographyBusinessFishingEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The inland fisheries of N orth A merica (i.e. C anada and the U nited S tates of A merica) are diverse in terms of the sectors that harvest fish, the waters fished and the species targeted. Aboriginal fisheries have a long tradition of harvesting fish for food and ceremonial purposes using gears such as dip nets and spears, and targeting species such as suckers ( C atostomidae) and upriver migrating salmon ( S almonidae). The commercial sector includes large‐scale industrial operations on the G reat L akes and M ississippi R iver as well as smaller‐scale fisheries throughout N orth A merica that harvest fish for food or the bait industry. The recreational fishery is the largest sector (millions of participants) and includes everything from specialised catch‐and‐release fisheries for muskellunge, E sox masquinongy M itchill and black bass ( M icropterus spp.) to put‐and‐take fisheries for rainbow trout, O ncorhynchus mykiss ( W albaum). All sectors provide substantial socio‐economic benefit and regionally can have significant cultural value and yield an important amount of food protein. Using the best available information and a number of assumptions, total harvest for all three sectors in the inland waters of N orth A merica was estimated to be &gt;480 000 t yr −1 . Nonetheless, there are a number of internal threats that face these fisheries including over‐exploitation, bycatch/release mortality as well as external threats such as inter‐sectoral conflict, environmental change, water availability, invasive species and habitat alteration. Given that most inland fisheries are managed at the state/provincial level, there is a need to adopt management strategies that are holistic, coordinated and trans‐jurisdictional if inland fisheries in N orth A merica are to be sustainable in the future. There is also a critical need for information management systems that enable regional data to be scaled up to the national or continental level, which would facilitate the generation of inland fisheries status reports and the monitoring of trends through time. All stakeholders must recognise that while inland fisheries tend to not receive the same attention from the media, public or politicians as marine fisheries, the potential for local and broad‐scale irreversible changes exist and need to be identified and addressed if the many ecosystem services that inland fisheries provide are to be maintained.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations48
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheries Management and EcologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207