EFFECTIVENESS OF A SELECTIVE HARVEST SYSTEM IN REGULATING DEER POPULATIONS IN ONTARIO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although wildlife management agencies commonly employ sex-selective harvests to regulate white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) populations, few studies have documented the effectiveness of these harvests. Using data from 1980 to 1997 for the Algonquin Highlands region of Ontario, Canada, we assessed (1) the ability of wildlife managers to control the size of the antlerless harvest using sex-selective permits, and (2) the ability of antlerless harvest to control changes in deer density. Antlerless harvest was related only to the number of permits issued when <40% of hunters had antlerless permits; above this threshold, kill was related only to hunter numbers, not the number of antlerless permits. Factors such as deer encounter rates and hunter selectivity or behavior also may influence the size of the kill. Historically, antlerless kill showed little detectable effect on deer population density, which appears to be regulated primarily by density-dependent factors. This implies that antlerless kill historically occurred at levels too low to depress populations, or that existing data are simply too noisy to allow detection of a kill effect. Either way, the current harvest management system appears to have little ability to regulate deer populations in Ontario. Declining hunter participation and/or increasing deer populations will only decrease the effectiveness of the current sport harvest for management, and wildlife managers may need to look to other means of managing the population.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".