Effects of tourist activities on ungulate behaviour in a mountain protected area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many protected areas seek to both preserve biodiversity and promote recreational activities. These objectives,however,may conflict if human activities reduce animal use of protected habitat. Todetermine if traffic volumeaffected the area-use pattern of wild ungulates, I conducted ungulate surveys along a road in the Sheep RiverProvincialPark, Alberta, over two years. I counted groups of four ungulate species, and compared the number seenduringweekdays (low traffic volume) and weekends (high volume). Fewer groups of all three cervid species were seenduringweekends than during weekdays, while no difference was observed for bighorn sheep. Bighorn sheep, however,flewat the sight of or when chased by domestic dogs. High traffic volume decreased ungulate use of habitat areaswithinsight of the road. Anthropogenic disturbance therefore led to habitat loss in this protected area becauseduringdays with heavy traffic, ungulates avoided habitat close to the road. Moreover,harassment by domestic dogsartificiallyincreases the predation risk perceived by ungulates, which is likely to increase vigilance, decrease foragingtimeand cause bighorn sheep to spend more time in escape terrain.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".