MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163759913

Opportunities and challenges to waterfowl habitat conservation on private land

2014· article· en· W2163759913 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William L. Hohman, Eric B. Lindstrom, Benjamin S. Rashford, James H. Devries

Bibliographic record

VenueWildfowl (Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceNatural Resources Conservation ServiceMississippi State UniversityU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsWaterfowlHabitat conservationHabitatWetland conservationWildlife conservationEnvironmental planningBird conservationEnvironmental resource managementGeographyAgricultureLand managementWildlifeBusinessPublic landPrivate sectorLand useAgroforestryWetlandEcologyEconomicsEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The future of North American waterfowl populations is inseparably tied to management of private land in the United States (U.S.) and Canada. Private land ownership in major waterfowl habitat regions such as the Northern Great Plains, Lower Mississippi Alluvial Valley, Gulf Coast and California’s Central Valley generally exceeds 90%, with agriculture being the dominant land-use in these regions. Planning and implementing avian conservation on private land in a strategic manner is complicated by a wide array of social, economic, political, administrative and scientific-technical issues. Prominent among these challenges are changing economic drivers influencing land-use decisions, integration of bird conservation objectives at various scales, reconciling differences in wildlife habitat objectives between bird conservationists and land-users, administrative impediments to conservation planning and implementation, technology and scientific information gaps, and inadequate personnel capacity and financial constraints to effectively plan and deliver conservation. Given these unprecedented challenges to waterfowl habitat conservation, the need for effective public-private partnerships and collaboration has never been greater. With the goal of advancing collaborative waterfowl conservation on private land, the broad goals of this paper are to: (1) increase stakeholder awareness of opportunities and challenges to waterfowl habitat conservation on private land, and (2) showcase examples of collaborative efforts that have successfully addressed these challenges. To accomplish these goals this paper is organised into three sections: (1) importance of agricultural policy to private land conservation, (2) habitat potential on agricultural working land, and (3) strategic approaches to waterfowl habitat conservation. U.S. Department of Agriculture conservation programmes authorised through the Conservation Title of the 1985 Food Security Act (hereafter, Farm Bill) and subsequent farm bills have provided unequalled potential for waterfowl habitat conservation on private land. Passage of the 2014 Farm Bill provides unique opportunities and alternative approaches to promote working land conservation strategies that are economically profitable and wildlifefriendly. However, reductions in private land conservation funding will require more effective targeting to maximise resource benefits. For example, in addition to conserving and restoring traditional habitats, we must work collaboratively to identify and promote working agricultural systems that are waterfowl-friendly and provide environmental services in addition to the production of food and fibre. Cultivation of rice Oryza sativa and winter cereals described below potentially represent two such situations. For over a quarter of a century the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) has served as a transformative model of partnershipbased, landscape-scale conservation (DOI & EC 1986). Whereas the original plan and subsequent updates established abundant waterfowl populations as the plan’s ultimate goal, the 2012 NAWMP revision seeks a formal integration of these objectives with societal needs and desires (DOI et al. 2012). The current plan recognises the critical importance of private working land; however, details are lacking, especially with respect to strategic targeting of conservation on private land. For example, the development of truly strategic plans to target waterfowl conservation on private land will require estimates of the benefits of various conservation alternatives, conservation costs, and the threat of habitat loss or conversion. We suggest development of spatially explicit models that inform landowners and managers at the field-level about the cost effectiveness of conservation and land-use options is critically needed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWildfowl (Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust)Same topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207