MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6983250022

Looking to the Future of Wildlife Conservation: Durable Wildlife Policy for the 21st Century

2022· dissertation· en· W6983250022 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Mathematics Enthusiast · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Physics and Python Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildlifeWildlife conservationNorth American Model of Wildlife ConservationWildlife managementScholarshipRevenueState (computer science)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wildlife conservation in the United States was built by the dollars of consumptive users. Monies from the sale of hunting licenses, as well as excise taxes on firearms, ammunition, and archery tackle through the Pittman-Robertson Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act (PR), currently fuel a complex system of wildlife conservation via multiple levels of government. However, the number of hunters in this country is rapidly declining, the sale of firearms and ammunition is increasingly unrelated to hunting, and contemporary consumers tend to express different values than traditional hunters. These changes pose significant challenges of relevancy and funding to state and federal fish and wildlife agencies charged with wildlife management and conservation. This thesis seeks to contribute to three topics that are relevant to the future of the field of wildlife conservation by clarifying commonly used – but rarely defined – language, analyzing state-specific responses to declines in funding for conservation, and analyzing concerns regarding the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. The first chapter of this thesis aims to clarify terms commonly used in scholarship related to the take of wildlife to facilitate clear communication. When definitions vary among practitioners and academics, misunderstandings and breakdowns in communication arise. Reconciling distinctions between legal and social licensure facilitates more accurate depictions of take. The second chapter catalogues and analyzes dedicated revenue generated for state wildlife agencies via 25 distinct mechanisms and sought to identify factors which influence intrastate diversity in dedicated revenue. The third chapter examines a growing body of literature regarding the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and finds significant variation in critiques of this concept. I address these concerns in the historical context of the model. In short, this thesis addresses wildlife communication, the funding model of wildlife conservation, and a model which describes one interpretation of the laws and policies which differentiate wildlife conservation in the United States and Canada from the rest of the world. It is my hope that this work will be of some use to those who seek to conserve wildlife and wild places for future generations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.841

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.265 · 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