Slow on the Trigger: The Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the\nFisheries Act and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans plays an Important role in protecting fish and fish habitat in Canada, primarily under the Fisheries Act. Section 5 of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act requires an environmental assessment when the Department takes certain actions under the Fisheries Act. In the past few years environmental interests have taken the Department to task claiming that it has circumvented assessment. The alleged circumvention occurs when proponents of projects that will harm fish habitat, in consultation with the Department, revamp the project to avoid harm, and the Department issues a letter of advice to the proponent The Department contends that in these circumstances no assessment is triggered. The author argues that, notwithstanding the Department's position, this course of action triggers an environmental assessment The article concludes with suggestions on how to facilitate the Department's compliance
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 | 0.010 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.044 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.004 |
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".