Quenching Instream Thirst: A Role for Water Trusts in the Prairie Provinces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The southern regions of the prairie provinces, Alberta, in particular, are water short. Some areas are over-allocated meaning that there is not enough water to satisfy all water rights. Increasing population and drier climate put greater stress on water supplies. With so much attention paid to what we need to take out of watercourses we sometimes lose sight of what we need to keep in them to restore and maintain aquatic and riparian ecological integrity, so vital to the existence of watercourses themselves. Water trusts play an important role in the western United States in helping to restore, maintain, and enhance the instream needs of aquatic and riparian systems. They work with water right holders and governments so that water that would otherwise be allocated out of stream is left in stream to replenish the system itself. This article considers whether there is a viable role for water trusts in the prairie provinces, focusing on Alberta. It examines existing water rights legal frameworks and considers to what extent they would support water trusts. The article concludes that there is a viable and even vital role for water trusts in the Canadian prairies.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".