MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168585365 · doi:10.1002/rra.888

Instream flows for recreation are closely correlated with mean discharge for rivers of western North America

2005· article· en· W2168585365 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stewart B. Rood, Chris George, Bobbi George, Wilco Tymensen

Bibliographic record

VenueRiver Research and Applications · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsChinook Regional HospitalUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceDrainage basinDischargeRating curveSTREAMSGeographyPhysical geographyGeologyEcologyCartographyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Effective river regulation requires consideration for environmental and economic aspects and also for social aspects including recreation. Our study investigated relationships between river hydrology and recreational flows (RF) for canoes, kayaks, rafts and other non‐motorized boats, for 27 river reaches in the Red Deer and Bow river basins of southern Alberta, Canada. A subjective RF method involved regression analyses of data from River Trip Report Cards, volunteer postcard‐style surveys rating flow sufficiency. A total of 958 trip reports were submitted for the rivers between 1983 and 1997 and about 30 reports permitted confident regression analysis for a river reach. Values from these analyses were very consistent with values from the ‘depth discharge method’, a hydraulic modelling approach that used stage–discharge ratings to determine flows that would produce typical depths of 60 and 75 cm for minimal and preferred flows, respectively. Values were also consistent with expert opinions from river guidebooks and maps and aggregate values were calculated from the combined RF methods. These were very closely correlated with mean discharge ( Q m ) across the rivers ( r 2 = 0.94 for minimal and 0.96 for preferred flows). The relationship best fitted a power function (straight plot on log versus log scales) with a consistent slope but vertical offset for minimal versus preferred flows. Close relationships between guidebook estimates of RF and Q m were also observed for rivers in the American Rocky Mountain states of Idaho ( r 2 = 0.55 and 0.74), Montana ( r 2 = 0.34 and 0.80) and Colorado ( r 2 = 0.43 and 0.51), but the association was weaker for the Pacific Northwest state of Oregon ( r 2 = 0.35 and 0.26). These analyses indicate that RF can be confidently determined through a combination of subjective and hydraulic methods and reveal that RF values represent a systematic function of discharge for a broad range of alluvial and constrained river reaches. From these analyses we provide the ‘Alberta equation’: minimal recreational flow = 3 × Q m 0.59 ( Q m in m 3 /s), and preferred flows would typically be 1.5 times higher. For other river regions the exponent ‘0.59’ may be relatively constant but adjustments to the coefficient ‘3’ could be applicable. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.665
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRiver Research and ApplicationsSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207