Cumulative Impacts of Tourist Resorts on Wild Reindeer (<i>Rangifer tarandus tarandus</i>) during Winter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Potential avoidance by wild reindeer (Rangifer tarandus tarandus) of high-altitude tourist resorts during winter was investigated in and near Rondane National Park in Norway. Distribution of reindeer was mapped using systematic snowmobile surveys during 1991-96 and compared with results from investigations of snow and vegetation characteristics. Maternal reindeer avoided a 10 km zone around the resort. Cows and calves increased in density from 0.6 ± 0.6 reindeer/km² at 5-10 km from the resort to 7.6 ± 2.2 reindeer/km² at 15-25 km from the resort. Bulls and yearlings were more tolerant, constituting nearly 92% of all observed animals 5-10 km from the resort. Nearly all animals avoided the zone within 5 km of the resort. There were no significant differences in distribution of lichen heath, hardness of snow, integrated ram hardness index (IRH) values, or snow depths on ridges with increasing distance from the resort. Available biomass of lichens was ca. 1200 g/m² 0-5 km from the resort and decreased to a low of ca. 250 g/m² at 15-25 km distance, a pattern that probably reflects overgrazing as a result of avoiding the tourist resort. Such avoidance implies reduced forage intake during winter, substantial reduction in available habitat, and lower productivity of the herd. The results suggest that avoidance by wild animals of sources of anthropogenic disturbance may involve long-term impacts, such as reductions in carrying capacity, that are more serious than those expected from direct physiological stress.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".