MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7133269571

Assessment of proposed harvest decision rules for the Atlantic Salmon recreational fishery : Miramichi River case study

2023· other· en· W7133269571 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. Breau, G. Chaput

Bibliographic record

VenueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationRecreational fishingFisheries managementFish <Actinopterygii>FishingBaseline (sea)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) is developing a precautionary approach (PA) framework for the management of the Atlantic Salmon recreational fisheries for DFO Gulf Region rivers. A DFO Fisheries Management-led working group (DFO-WG) convened over the previous year to discuss and develop candidate harvest decision rules (HDRs) for the Atlantic Salmon recreational fishery using the Miramichi River as a case study. The candidate HDRs for the recreational fishery are evaluated for compliance to the PA policy and supporting science advice. The candidate HDRs specify management measures for different levels of abundance prior to recreational fisheries rather than being specific about exploitation rates. There is insufficient information to determine the extent to which the described management measures will change the exploitation rates and losses due to fishing. Using historical exploitation rates and assumed catch and release mortality rates from the Miramichi River, the management measures in the candidate HDRs are translated into the proportion of the total eggs lost from recreational fishing. The losses for similar management measures are higher in the Northwest Miramichi compared to the Southwest Miramichi because of differing biological characteristics and seasonal catch profiles between the two rivers. Several elements of the candidate HDRs, such as adjusting losses for three status zones and maximum losses being less than the removal rate reference, comply with the PA policy. Other elements of the candidate HDRs may not comply with the PA policy, subject to interpretation. One key element is the interpretation of the PA statements that removals be kept to the lowest level possible and no tolerance for preventable decline when the stock is in the critical zone. Both candidate rules would allow a directed catch and release recreational fishery when the abundance is in the critical zone; directed fisheries would only be closed if the abundance before fishing was < 15% or < 25% of the Limit Reference Point (LRP), dependent on the rule. The losses from a catch and release fishery in the critical zone would be approx. 1% of the eggs prior to the fishery but could be as high as 4 to 7% if the season-adjusted catch and release mortality rate was in the range of 16 to 25% as indicated from a wider meta-analysis of studies and mean water temperatures in the Miramichi, rather than 3% mortality rate that has been used to date. The implementation of the candidate HDRs requires a forecast of expected abundance prior to the fishery. The performance of the candidate HDRs and compliance to the PA policy will need to be re evaluated to take account of the uncertainties and biases of the forecast model and the decision making process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.268 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada→French-language works237,207→