Active Fans and Grizzly Bears: Reducing Risks for Campers 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Where multiple hazards are present, appropriate risk management must consider all hazards. In Kluane National Park and Reserve (Kluane) in southwestern Yukon Territory, Canada, grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) and hydrogeomorphic processes represent two hazards with distinct characteristics and influencing factors. Though rare, some interactions between people and bears in Kluane have had serious consequences—for both people and bears. In this study, the objective for the team of biologists and hydrogeomorphologists was to reduce risks for wilderness campers along the Slims West Trail. Biologists identified open portions of geomorphic fans for potential campsites as they had lower bear-related hazards than vegetated areas but they sought the advice of physical scientists due to evidence of hydrogeomorphic events. During subsequent field study, debris flow, debris flood, and flood deposits were identified. We analyzed the combined hydrogeomorphic and bear-related hazard using a risk analysis approach. Combining the two hazards required researchers develop a basic understanding of the other discipline, overcome differences in perspective and approach to reducing risk, and resolution of discrepancies regarding hazard and risk terminology. The result of the analysis is a decision-making framework that can be applied to reduce risks for campers and also reduce risks for bears. The method includes both landscape and site scales and is based on easily understood and readily available information regarding local weather, vegetation, stream bank conditions, and bear ecology and behaviour. Developing this framework required the integration of expertise on the hydrogeormophology of the Slims River valley and its tributaries, and the ecology and behaviour of grizzly bears that use the valley. Educating wilderness campers and providing a method of decision-making to reduce risk supports Parks Canada's public safety program; a program based on the principle of user selfsufficiency. Reducing bear-human conflicts also complements the efforts of Parks Canada to ensure a healthy grizzly bear 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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".