NTFP Conference Proceedings “Keeping it Living”: Applications and Relevance of Traditional Plant Management in British Columbia to Sustainable Harvesting of Non-timber Forest Products
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract.—There has been increasing concern about sustainability in harvesting and marketing of non-timber forest products in North America. This paper examines traditional approaches and practices for use of plant resources by Aboriginal peoples and discusses their applications in a contemporary context. Philosophies and attitudes of caring and respect are embodied in many traditional resource use systems, and these can become models for developing a responsible land ethic as an essential component of any program of sustainable land use. Aboriginal peoples have also developed and used a variety of practices and techniques in resource management that maintain the capacity for growth and regeneration of species being harvested, including re-planting and transplanting, pruning and coppicing, and burning. These also have relevance in current harvesting and pro-duction systems. Traditional systems of tenure, too, have enabled Aboriginal peoples to control access and monitor impacts of use. Traditional modes of knowledge transmission, including experimen-tal, site-based learning, use of specialized names and vocabulary, stories, discourse, and ceremonial reinforcement of values of respect and careful use, are also potentially valuable and applicable to contemporary harvesting practices for NTFPs. In such applications, however, the rights and interests of Aboriginal peoples must be recognized and incorporated in any relevant NTFP use.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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 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".