内陸アラスカ・クスコクィム川上流域におけるサケ漁撈史と現代的課題
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, I describe a history of indigenous salmon fishing technologies and management issues in the Upper Kuskokwim region, Alaska, U.S.A. As a traditional food, salmon has been an important part of culture for the Upper Kuskokwim Athabascan people. Intensive contacts with non-Natives in the early 20th century brought some changes to Upper Kuskokwim people’s subsistence technologies including fishwheels, which made it possible to obtain large amount of salmon efficiently in siltladen main streams of the Upper Kuskokwim tributaries. Conflicts with non-Native wildlife management regime began after Alaska’s statehood when the State banned salmon fishing technology which involves blocking the entire width of a river or stream. As a result, Upper Kuskokwim people were forced to abandon their fishing weirs and fences at Salmon River since the late 1960s. After a decade or so, subsistence salmon fishing with rods and reels resumed at Salmon River. Nowadays, Salmon River Culture Camp has been organized by Nikolai Village Council to revitalize their fishing traditions. Since the 2010s, severe decline of king salmon populations in Alaska and Yukon has become a serious issue in indigenous societies of the areas. Local people think that commercial fishing (including bycatch) in high sea negatively affects the king salmon populations, while some others point out that increased activities by beavers and low-level of water in interior rivers might have been causing disruption of salmon's upstream migration. Through my observation of people’s activities in salmon spawning areas, I argue that making a small opening to beaver dams (instead of totally destroying them) may actually benefit spawning salmon populations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".