Balancing wildlife protection and wildfire threat mitigation using a network optimization approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In boreal forests of North America, land managers often carry out preventive treatments of forest fuel for the protection of human infrastructure from wildfires. However, these treatments may negatively affect other ecosystem services, such as the capacity to sustain wildlife populations. Here, we examine the efficacy of a strategy aimed at preserving a critical movement corridor for boreal woodland caribou ( Rangifer tarandus caribou ) in northern Québec, Canada, by raising high-voltage power line conductors above the forest canopy. To assess the interplay between the caribou protection objectives and a reduction in power line's exposure to wildfires, we developed an optimization model that combines the objectives of protecting the power line from wildfires via fuel treatments and maintaining a suitable movement corridor for caribou. The model combines a critical node detection (CND) problem with a habitat connectivity problem that allocates a minimum-resistance fixed-width habitat corridor between isolated wildlife refuges. Our results identify the best locations to perform fire fuel treatments to lessen the threat of fire damage to human infrastructure while maintaining a connectivity corridor for caribou in present and future climate scenarios. The selected fuel treatment locations aimed to mitigate wildfire exposure to a power line. In small-budget solutions, the exposure of power line infrastructure to wildfires was reduced by 36–39% in current climate conditions and by 20–31% in future climate, compared with no-treatment scenarios. Despite the detrimental effects of wildfire on both the industrial asset and caribou habitat, the approach provides strategies that help achieve a compromise between these two values. Such knowledge is timely to help mitigate the negative impacts of climate change on human livelihoods and natural ecosystems.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".