MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414372710 · doi:10.1007/s00267-025-02172-8

The Wolverine Project: Evaluating Cumulative Effects Within the Land of Ktunaxa Using the One Heart Method

2025· article· en· W4414372710 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan J. MacDonald, Christopher Horsethief, Chad Luke, Michael F. Proctor, Marlene Machmer, Vi Birdstone, Ray Warden, Curtis Wullum, Rachel Plewes, M. Chernos, Matt Carlson

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & TechnologyBC Innovation CouncilPacific Insight Electronics (Canada)BC Hydro (Canada)National Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationWildlifeCumulative effectsHabitatBaseline (sea)Land useClimate changeWildlife conservationRange (aeronautics)Wildlife management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluated the cumulative effects of existing and proposed land use activities and climate change within a narrow and vital wildlife corridor considered of high value to Ktunaxa and non-Ktunaxa peoples. Cumulative alteration, degradation, and disturbance to habitat directly impacts Ktunaxa lands and waters on which the exercise of Ktunaxa rights depends. Increased access to backcountry areas are expected to substantially diminish habitat condition, increase wildlife displacement and mortality risk, and fragment wildlife populations with unavoidable population-level impacts. The effects of land use are likely to be exacerbated by accelerating climate change further limiting habitat suitability and creating additional human-wildlife interactions. This study is unique in that we applied Ktunaxa research methodology throughout all assessment stages. This iterative approach to knowledge gathering brings Ktunaxa and non-Ktunaxa together in concert with input from a diverse group of problem solvers. Further, we used this opportunity to refine our understanding of cumulative effects through a Ktunaxa linguistic perspective. Repeated interviews deepened research relationships and empowered use of Ktunaxa oral history in the evaluation of cumulative effects. Two species of key concern identified for this study were ʔaȼ̓pu (wolverine) and kɬawɬa (grizzly bear). We simulated current and future habitat condition for key values using a pre-contact baseline representing the Range of Natural Variability (RONV). The assessment presented herein considered past, current, and proposed future land use activities, with a focus on recreational interests. We found combined effects of proposed recreation developments with existing land use practices within the study area to substantially negatively impact both wolverine and grizzly bear habitat condition and population connectivity. We concluded that cumulative developments of past, current and any potential future land use that includes outdoor recreational activities in ʔamak̓is Ktunaxa must be informed by regional-scale and long-term land stewardship planning to prevent further adverse impacts and to ultimately improve the habitat conditions for ʔa·kxam̓is q̓api qapsin (All Living Things).

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ManagementSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207