MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6996162865

From Reclamation to Conservation: A History of Settler Place-Making in Burns Bog, British Columbia

2019· other· en· W6996162865 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueYorkSpace (York University) · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBogWetlandPeatLand reclamationPeriod (music)ColonialismArable landEnvironmental history
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wetlands are, in the Canadian settler imaginary, ambiguous spaces that are neither strictly landmasses nor only bodies of water. This paper explores how Canadian settler-colonialism has incorporated wetlands into systems of land ownership and control by tracing the history a specific wetland, a peat bog known as Burns Bog since the 1930s in the area settlers call Delta, British Columbia. Given its presence as one of the largest wetlands in the region, settlers failed to drain the bog in its entirety. As a result, the bog persisted throughout the history of settlers’ presence on the west coast and has been subjected to waves of settler approaches, making it an ideal case study to consider how ongoing settler-colonialism has shaped, and continues to shape, wetlands. Previous historical works on wetlands in Canada and the United States have documented how early settlers, through to roughly the mid-twentieth century, worked to “reclaim” wetlands and transform them into arable land. However, these accounts have often neglected to continue their analysis of settler-colonialism beyond this period and have, as a result, treated settlers’ more contemporary views of wetlands -- as ecologically valuable ecosystems that need to be conserved or restored -- as a break in colonial dynamics. This research intervenes in this existing body of work by treating shifting practices towards wetlands as successive stages in efforts to incorporate wetlands into settler-colonial logics. I argue that these different practices need to be interrogated for how they both rely on similar logics, frameworks, and approaches to the nonhuman, and for how they further the settler-colonial project of suppressing Indigenous voices, histories, and relations to land. The paper draws upon Indigenous studies, queer ecology, and posthumanism to develop a more theoretically robust framework through which to approach the history of Burns Bog. I use a collection of archival and secondary materials—particularly early ethnographies of the region— to trace Indigenous and settler relations to the bog. In chapter 1, I present a framework that pays particular attention to settler practices and conceptions of land, biopolitical capitalist subsumption of the nonhuman, and methods of thinking with and through water. In chapter 2, I trace the bog’s history from its formation through to the 1920s, including Indigenous peoples’ relations to the bog and early settler efforts to reclaim the bog. Chapter 3 explores the rise of different settler practices in the bog from the 1930s to the 1980s, especially peat extraction, cranberry farming, and the use of the bog as a landfill. Chapter 4 presents the rise in scientific and conservation approaches to Burns Bog, highlighting how they provide a means for making the bog more legible and enabling more extensive settler direction of nonhuman beings within the bog as well as the resurgence of Indigenous claims to the bog. I argue that by viewing wetlands as ongoing and overlapping collections of material and narrative practices, we can see how contemporary conservation politics often function as an extension of settler domination of land.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.194
Teacher spread0.178 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYorkSpace (York University)French-language works237,207