Science response: mapping tools for fish habitat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On August 28, 2019, a new Fisheries Act came into force with restored protections and modernizations to help safeguard fish and fish habitat. To implement the modernized Act, the Fish and Fish Habitat Protection Program (FFHPP) has more capacity to work with communities, partners, and stakeholders in freshwater, coastal and marine environments to undertake activities that will improve outcomes for fish and fish habitat through conservation, protection, and restoration. FFHPP plans to improve how it reports to Canadians on both its own activities related to fish and fish habitat protection and the important related work of partners and stakeholders. Modern tools and approaches to track and assess the health or state of fish and fish habitat are needed to support responsive and integrated regulatory, planning, partnership and monitoring activities by FFHPP and to demonstrate improved outcomes for sustainability of fish and fish habitat. Fisheries and Oceans Canada’s (DFO) Fish and Fish Habitat Protection Program requested that Science Branch review geospatial tools to identify freshwater-related indicators and metrics (i.e., representative measures) to assess and report on the status of threats and state of fish habitat, including but not limited to those listed in the Fish and Fish Habitat Protection Policy Statement (DFO 2019) and the Interim Risk Management Guide for the Protection of Fish and Fish Habitat (DFO 2019b). The threats listed in the policy are habitat degradation, habitat modification, aquatic invasive species, pollution, and climate change. Those listed in the guide are sedimentation, deleterious substances, and change or loss of riparian zone, aquatic habitat and vegetation, fish passage, dissolved oxygen, and nutrients. The overexploitation of fish and provincially managed species, and change in food supply, noise, light, and electromagnetic field are beyond the scope of this request. Public facing geospatial tools that provided indicators of human activities and threats to fish habitat and watersheds in the Pacific Region were reviewed alongside key habitat threats of DFO-managed freshwater and anadromous species as identified by the FFHPP threats listed above and the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). For example, existing tools for British Columbia and the Yukon included the Pacific Salmon Explorer, World Wildlife Fund Watershed Reports and British Columbia (BC)’s Stewardship Baseline Objectives Tool. In total, thirteen geospatial tools were assessed and compared using Pathways of Effects diagrams. Global Threats to Human Water Security and River Biodiversity and World Wildlife Fund-Canada were the highest ranking tools in terms of the number of threats they addressed that have been identified as important to fish and fish habitat by both FFHPP and COSEWIC. This Science Response results from the Science Response Process of July 27, 2022 on Geospatial Mapping Tools, Indicators, and Metrics for Fish Habitat in the Pacific Region. The assessment and advice will be used to inform FFHPP Pacific Region activities associated with the implementation of the modernized Fisheries Act, including being able to articulate how FFHPP Pacific is working to develop habitat status or health indicators. This advice will also inform planning for future reporting in part by identifying gaps and uncertainties in effectively identifying habitat status.
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 | 0.024 | 0.086 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.039 |
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".