MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413020243 · doi:10.1139/facets-2025-0109

Opportunities and limitations of Canada's Species at Risk Act for protecting Pacific salmonids: lessons learned from the case of the Thompson River steelhead

2025· article· en· W4413020243 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Amanda L. Jeanson, Nathan Young, Joseph Bennett, Steven J. Cooke

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGenome Canada
KeywordsFisheryGeographyBusinessEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Imperilled species legislation is a critical tool at various levels of government for biodiversity conservation. In this article, we examine the opportunities and limitations of Canada's Species at Risk Act (SARA) to protect a highly threatened population of Pacific salmonid in British Columbia—the Thompson River steelhead ( Oncorhynchus mykiss). To date, no Pacific salmonids have been listed under Canada's SARA despite critical population declines. The case of Thompson River steelhead is relevant because this species is often viewed as the “canary in the coal mine” for other Canadian Pacific salmonids and recently went through the Canadian listing process for imperilled native species. Thompson River steelhead, which is a culturally and socio-economically valuable migratory salmonid species, was deemed to be “endangered” by the Committee on the Status of Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) following an emergency assessment completed in February of 2018. The assessment noted population declines of 79% over the last three generations, yet Thompson River steelhead were ultimately not listed under Canada's SARA. Our analysis of this case is based on semi-structured interviews with individuals involved with, or knowledgeable about, the COSEWIC and SARA listing process for Thompson River steelhead ( N = 17). Findings from these interviews point to several structural and institutional reasons why this species was not listed despite its precarious status: (1) spillover effects from listing species under SARA, (2) time required to complete listing processes, (3) reactive rather than proactive emergency listing processes, (4) listing decisions based on socioeconomic considerations rather than conservation science, and (5) lack of transparency in listing processes. Interview participants suggested several solutions to overcome these limitations, including (1) allowing for the management of co-migratory stocks following SARA listings, (2) expediting listing timelines, (3) making listing processes more pro-active, and (4) ensuring transparent, science-based decision-making. Our analysis demonstrates the potential of SARA listings to protect aquatic species and suggests paths forward to improving the effectiveness of Canada's SARA.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0350.022
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0080.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.139 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207