Stawamus Chief Provincial Park : monitoring and protection of nesting peregrine falcons from impacts of rock climbing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 2010, BC Parks has conducted a Peregrine Falcon Monitoring Program in Stawamus Chief Provincial Park. Working in partnership with BC Parks, this report answers the research question: How can BC Parks improve the monitoring and protection of nesting Peregrine Falcons from the recreational impacts of rock climbing on the Stawamus Chief? This final report was completed through literature review, examining a case study of the Colorado plateau, and two expert interviews. The expert interviews were with Pinnacles National Park Raptor Biologist, Gavin Emmons, and a former monitoring program volunteer who wishes to remain anonymous. Please refer to the below table for the three main components of this project, their descriptions, and my recommendations to BC Parks. Project Components: Peregrine Falcon Monitoring Program. Description: The monitoring program runs between March 1st and July 31st, twice a week, for three to four hours a shift The goal of the program is to locate as many nesting falcon pairs as possible so that adjacent climbing routes can be closed Recommendation: Increasing monitoring in March and April may result in more sightings More engagement with the rock climbing community will generate more awareness of the program and hopefully more sympathy for the cause which may result in respecting closures and more reports of falcon sightings to Parks BC. Volunteers. Description: Parks BC’s has struggled to recruit and retain volunteers for the falcon monitoring program since the position is very time consuming and has low reward. Recommendation: Reaching out to local bird watching societies, university students, and rock climbers and outdoor enthusiasts with a wildlife biology or conservation background
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".