MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4254393558 · doi:10.1353/his.2020.0046

Rocking P Ranch and the Second Cattle Frontier in Western Canada by Clay Chattaway and Warren Elofson

2020· article· en· W4254393558 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Jamie Murton

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoire sociale · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrontierGeographyTimelineHistoryArchaeologyEconomic history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Rocking P Ranch and the Second Cattle Frontier in Western Canada by Clay Chattaway and Warren Elofson Jamie Murton Chattaway, Clay, and Warren Elofson – Rocking P Ranch and the Second Cattle Frontier in Western Canada. Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 2019. Pp. 254. There are "very few really bountiful primary materials with which to chart rural family history," Clay Chattaway and Warren Elofson rightly declare on page 1 of this book, the product of a particularly bountiful collection. The Macleay family papers—detailed business records, diaries, letters, timelines and, especially, the Rocking P Gazette, an illustrated newsletter produced for the Rocking P Ranch from 1923–1925—chart the history of the Rocking P Ranch of southern Alberta. Chattaway and Elofson particularly lean on the remarkable Gazette, edited and mostly written and illustrated by owner Rod and Laura Macleay's daughters Dorothy and Maxine. The result is a beautifully illustrated book that provides a fascinating glimpse into a particular time and place, the world of southern Alberta ranch country before the Second World War. The book is divided into two sections. The first tells the story of the Macleay family and the founding and development of their ranch. Rod, a native of Quebec's Eastern Townships, came west in 1901 with 329 head of cattle in order to make his fortune in western Canada. In its first attempt to turn the arid grasslands of southern Alberta into meat and cash, the Canadian government had previously ceded large areas to big cattle companies, who, following the practice on the US southern plains, turned animals loose to graze. Then came the "killing winter of 1906/7." On November 15, 1906, "rain that had been falling for two weeks suddenly turned to snow and the temperature plummeted. … Some three feet of snow fell in a few hours. Then the temperature climbed above freezing for a few hours and quickly dropped again, forming a layer of hard crust under the fresh snow…" (p. 34). Cattle, left alone on the high plains and unable to reach the grass, died of starvation and cold. Rod Macleay and other family operators, however, who held cattle behind fences and stored hay and other feed for them, survived with their herds largely intact. The killing winter meant the end of the large companies and the start of the family era. Family operators understood, Chattaway and Elofson argue, that they needed to work within the limits of the environment. They practiced not just ranching but also mixed farming, by which they fed their livestock and themselves. They solved the problem of overgrazing. Laura, later with her daughters, fed the ranch by buying food and growing it and also by being a deft hand with a .22 rifle. Laura and Rod were also savvy businesspeople, and the ranch grew. When they bought the Bar S Ranch in 1919 it was news as far away as Manitoba, and Dorothy and Maxine's Gazette served a large community of family and hired hands across several sites. The claim that the mixed family farm was a superior vehicle for organizing an economically and environmentally sustainable form of ranching is fascinating, and it would have been interesting to hear more. What exactly is it about the family farm model that allowed it to work sustainably? The authors argue that the presence of the owner was crucial—Rod Macleay had a hand in every aspect [End Page 686] of the ranch's operation. But why exactly large corporations could not pen and manage livestock and family operations could is not drawn out in any detail. Nor is it directly explained how the family ranches solved the problem of overgrazing; rather, Macleay is praised for drawing on the ranch's own resources and using up "substandard grain" as feed (p. 43). It would also have been good to hear more about the Rocking P Ranch as a family farm. Many of the arguments made here about the operation of the ranch parallel recent arguments made by other historians. R. W. Sandwell argues that, up to the Second World War, Canadian rural households typically relied on a combination of off-farm work, the growing of...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.159 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoire sociale→Same topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis→French-language works237,207→