首页> 外文期刊>Marine policy >Is a stock overfished if it is depleted by overfishing? A response to the rebuttal of Agnew et al. to Froese and Proelss 'Evaluation and legal assessment of certified seafood'
【24h】

Is a stock overfished if it is depleted by overfishing? A response to the rebuttal of Agnew et al. to Froese and Proelss 'Evaluation and legal assessment of certified seafood'

机译:如果过度捕捞耗尽了种群,是否过度捕捞?对Agnew等人的反驳的回应。 Froese and Proelss的“认证海鲜的评估和法律评估”

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

This contribution is a response to the rebuttal of Agnew et al. (2012) to Froese and Proelss (2012) "Evaluation and legal assessment of certified seafood". It corrects some factually wrong statements in the rebuttal, revisits the definitions of 'depleted' and 'overfished', and notes that the rebuttal agrees with the international definition of 'overfishing' (F> F_(MSY)) that was used by Froese and Proelss (2012). The rebuttal presents an analysis of 45 MSC-certified stocks. Of these, 27% are 'depleted' (according to the definition used by MSC) or 'overfished' (according to the definition used by Froese and Proelss 2012) and 16% are subject to 'overfishing', basically confirming the critique of Froese and Proelss (2012). This response concludes that MSC has to change its rules for certification such that (1) overfishing is not allowed and (2) 'depleted' stocks are marked as such.
机译:这种贡献是对Agnew等人的反驳的回应。 (2012)到Froese and Proelss(2012)“认证海鲜的评估和法律评估”。它纠正了反驳中的一些事实错误陈述,重新审视了“耗尽”和“过度捕捞”的定义,并指出反驳与Froese和Froese所使用的“过度捕捞”(F> F_(MSY))的国际定义相符。 Proelss(2012)。该驳回提出了对45种MSC认证库存的分析。其中,有27%的人“耗尽”(根据MSC的定义)或“过度捕捞”(根据Froese和Proelss 2012使用的定义),而16%的“过度捕捞”,基本上证实了对Froese的批评和Proelss(2012)。该答复的结论是,MSC必须更改其认证规则,以便(1)不允许过度捕捞,并且(2)如此标记“枯竭”的种群。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号