JOINT CANADA/UNITED STATES WILDLIFE RESPONSE PLANNING: DIXON ENTRANCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Neither wildlife nor oil spills acknowledge international boundaries. Both migratory birds and marine mammals move freely between Alaska in the United States and British Columbia in Canada, in the international boundary area known as Dixon Entrance in the North Pacific Ocean. An oil spill on one side of the border may be carried by winds and/or currents into the waters of the adjacent country. Recognition of these facts resulted in the development of the Canada/United States Joint Marine Pollution Contingency Plan, which was signed by the Canadian Coast Guard (CCG) and U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) in 1974. Annexes were subsequently prepared for five transboundary areas, including Dixon Entrance. Following the promulgation of these annexes, joint exercises have been held to enhance annex implementation. In September 1999, at the request of the USCG and CCG, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Alaska Office of Environmental Policy and Compliance (DOI-OEPC) took the lead in organizing and chairing a workshop to discuss issues associated with wildlife response activities for oil spills that cross the Canada/United States border in Dixon Entrance. The workshop was held in Prince Rupert, British Columbia as part of a 4-day joint meeting. Workshop participants included representatives from key U.S. federal and Alaska State wildlife resource agencies, Canadian federal wildlife resource agencies, oil spill cooperatives for Southeast Alaska and British Columbia, and the USCG. Wildlife resource agency representatives participating in the workshop reached consensus that the goal of wildlife protection is to make decisions based on what is best for the wildlife resources and then to determine how the goal can be accomplished within the constraints of each countries regulatory process. Agreement was reached to form a Canada/United States working group to develop a joint wildlife response plan. The plan, which will focus on migratory birds and sea otters, will address issues associated with the removal of dead oiled wildlife from the environment, hazing of unoiled wildlife, preemptive capture of sea otters, and capture and treatment of oiled migratory birds and sea otters. A draft plan will be developed prior to a September 2000, Canada/U.S. Dixon Entrance (CANUSDIX) joint meeting, which will be held in Ketchikan, Alaska.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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 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".