Looking Through Cloudy Waters — A Historical Analysis of the Legislative Declarations of Crown Water Rights in Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper analyses a keystone of the legislative framework for water rights — the legislative declarations of government or Crown rights to water in Alberta. These declarations originated in the first water rights legislation adopted by Parliament in the late 1800s, but they have been changed numerous times, resulting in a dynamic, complex and arguably confusing evolution. Viewed both individually and collectively through their evolutionary history, these rights declarations arguably raise more questions than they answer. Chief among these questions are: What purpose have they served? What non-legislative public or private rights and public duties have they recognized? Are either the declared rights, or the private rights issued from Crown rights, in the nature of “property”? And finally, is there any current legal effect of the widely varying Crown rights declarations over time? If nothing else, the numerous legislative formulations of this declaration over the years indicate that the concept of Crown rights to water is itself murky and, thus, should be clarified as part of any effort to reform the allocation system.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".