Integrating Indigenous knowledge across homelands and scientific knowledge to support collaborative harvest management for Emperor Goose in Alaska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study documented Indigenous knowledge and perspectives about Emperor Goose (Anser canagicus) in Alaska to support use of both Indigenous and scientific knowledge in harvest management. For decades, limited numbers of Emperor Goose available for a sustainable harvest have underscored challenges for harvest management. We interviewed 37 respondents in 20 communities representing five Indigenous groups whose homelands overlap with the Emperor Goose range in Alaska. Interview topics addressed ethnotaxonomy, harvest practices, uses, cultural importance, ecology, and harvest management. We identified 56 names for geese in Indigenous languages and English. Respondents were attentive to factors affecting goose body condition and reported that bird migrations have occurred earlier in spring and later in fall. Wild foods are key for the well-being of the Indigenous communities, and Emperor Goose is one of many species in seasonal harvest cycles. Most respondents thought that Emperor Goose harvest decreased during their lifetime and that current harvests are sustainable. Some said that Emperor Goose numbers have not rebounded to previous levels. Not overharvesting, self-restraint, not wasting, specific times to curtail harvest, and harvest opportunities for future generations were themes in traditional harvest management. Egg harvest closure had the strongest support among other harvest-limiting actions. Indigenous knowledge combined across cultural groups generally aligned with scientific knowledge. This study highlighted the value of integrating Indigenous and scientific knowledge across the entire range and annual cycle of migratory species. Respondents were receptive to values-based harvest management developed with Indigenous participation. However, a better understanding of traditional Indigenous harvest management remains an information gap in harvest management and species conservation. Diverse perspectives and social-ecological contexts among subsistence users call for management approaches for Emperor Goose that are locally meaningful and broadly acceptable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".