Harvest Management of Tundra Swans Cygnus columbianus in North
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sport hunting of Tundra Swans in the U.S. is regulated under provisions o f the Migratory Bird Treaty Act o f 1918. Management plans cooperatively developed and agreed to between Flyway Councils and Federal wildlife agencies in Canada and the U.S. prescribe allowable harvest levels and provisions for regulating it. Harvests are managed by Eastern and Western Populations. Presently, hunts are authorized in specific locations during fall migration in the States o f Alaska, Montana, Nevada, North and South Dakota, and Utah and on wintering areas in the States o f New Jersey, North Carolina, and Virginia. A specified number of permits are approved by the USFWS to participating states allowing each applicant to take one Tundra Swan per season. During 1979-88, the number of permits to harvest Western Population swans has averaged 3,552 per year. Of these, 1,075 swans are retrieved and 2 15 unretrieved. During 1986-88, an average of6,467permits have been issued to harvest Eastern Population swans. Of these, an average of 2,6 17 swans are retrieved and 302 unretrieved. In recent years, about 10,000permits are issued and account fo r a total kill o f about 4,200 annually, including retrieved and unretrieved. Of this amount, 70 % are derivedfrom the Eastern Population and 30 % results from the Western Population. These harvest estimates account for less than 3 % of the pre-season winter population estimate and are below the
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".