Fish-hood: Environmental assessment, critical Indigenous studies, and posthumanism at Fish Lake (Teztan Biny), Tsilhqot’in territory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is about how fish are regulated through environmental assessment. The theoretical frame used is nested between critical Indigenous studies and posthumanism which allows for an interrogation of how fish are very formally produced as disposable through mining regulatory procedures, such as environmental impact statements, that form the basis of the environmental assessment processes in Canada. The site of analysis is Fish Lake on Tsilhqot’in lands in the interior of British Columbia. I look at the corporate-scientific foundation of Canadian federal environmental assessment and an amendment within the federal Fisheries Act that allows fish bearing lakes to be turned into mining waste areas. An analysis of the use of these regulations illuminates part of the story about a twice-rejected copper–gold mine proposal at Fish Lake. In light of how Canadian regulations can produce fish as disposable, I explore if the value of fish can be explained externally from capital accumulation and technical representations in scientific studies within environmental assessment. The article reveals the environmental assessment process largely negates what I refer to as “fish-hood.”
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| 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".