Determining effects of an all weather logging road on winter woodland caribou habitat use in south-eastern Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Owl Lake boreal woodland caribou population is the most southerly population in Manitoba. It is provincially ranked as a High Conservation Concern Population. Forestry operations exist in the area and there are plans for further forest harvest and renewal. The Happy Lake logging road is the only main access through the Owl Lake winter range. This logging road is currently closed to the public and access is limited to forestry operations during specific times of the year. An integrated forestry/caribou management strategy for the area provides for the maintenance of minimum areas of functional habitat. Habitat quality along the road was compared to habitat quality in the winter core use areas, within the winter range and outside the winter range. To evaluate the extent of functional habitat near the road, we conducted animal location and movement analysis using GPS data collected from January 2002 to March 2006. Habitat quality in the winter range, core use areas and along the road were assessed and found to be similar. Analysis of caribou locations and movement illustrate less use of high quality habitat adjacent to the Happy Lake Road. Loss of functional habitat is suggested to occur within 1 kilometre of the road. This potential loss of functional habitat should be incorporated into integrated forestry and caribou conservation strategies. Road management is recommended to minimize the potential sensory disturbance and associated impacts of all weather access on boreal woodland caribou.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".