美国基本鱼类栖息地法规:高纬度地区的经验教训?

Aileen M. Nimick, B. Harris
{"title":"美国基本鱼类栖息地法规:高纬度地区的经验教训?","authors":"Aileen M. Nimick, B. Harris","doi":"10.1163/22116427_008010014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Commercial fisheries in the United States are managed by eight regional fisheries management councils operating under the authority of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS, Department of Commerce) and governed by the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act and accompanying federal guidelines. The Act mandates that NMFS identify essential fish habitat (EFH) for fish stocks and minimize, to the extent practicable, adverse effects to EFH through the councils’ fishery management plan development and revisions process. The statute and regulatory guidelines implicitly assume that NMFS and councils have the scientific information necessary to make informed EFH designations for all commercially harvested species, assess the realized or potential threats to EFH, and have the management tools to protect EFH. Further, the interpretation and implementation of several important, but ambiguous, terms in the guidelines are left to NMFS and the councils. Our thesis is that these factors (specifically, insufficient information support and regulatory ambiguities) can and are resulting in inconsistent and potentially sub-optimal fish habitat management throughout the country. As we enter an era of increased climate variability these factors may be having a disproportionally high impact in higher latitudes where change is expected to be more rapid. Here we provide a brief history of essential fish habitat regulations, explain the issues arising from the state of the science and regulatory ambiguities, and conclude with a discussion of the implications and recommendations for United States high latitude EFH management.","PeriodicalId":202575,"journal":{"name":"The Yearbook of Polar Law Online","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Essential Fish Habitat Regulation in the United States: Lessons for High Latitudes?\",\"authors\":\"Aileen M. Nimick, B. Harris\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/22116427_008010014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Commercial fisheries in the United States are managed by eight regional fisheries management councils operating under the authority of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS, Department of Commerce) and governed by the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act and accompanying federal guidelines. The Act mandates that NMFS identify essential fish habitat (EFH) for fish stocks and minimize, to the extent practicable, adverse effects to EFH through the councils’ fishery management plan development and revisions process. The statute and regulatory guidelines implicitly assume that NMFS and councils have the scientific information necessary to make informed EFH designations for all commercially harvested species, assess the realized or potential threats to EFH, and have the management tools to protect EFH. Further, the interpretation and implementation of several important, but ambiguous, terms in the guidelines are left to NMFS and the councils. Our thesis is that these factors (specifically, insufficient information support and regulatory ambiguities) can and are resulting in inconsistent and potentially sub-optimal fish habitat management throughout the country. As we enter an era of increased climate variability these factors may be having a disproportionally high impact in higher latitudes where change is expected to be more rapid. Here we provide a brief history of essential fish habitat regulations, explain the issues arising from the state of the science and regulatory ambiguities, and conclude with a discussion of the implications and recommendations for United States high latitude EFH management.\",\"PeriodicalId\":202575,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Yearbook of Polar Law Online\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-02-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Yearbook of Polar Law Online\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/22116427_008010014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Yearbook of Polar Law Online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22116427_008010014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

美国的商业渔业由国家海洋渔业局(NMFS,商务部)授权下的八个区域渔业管理委员会管理,并受《马格努森-史蒂文斯渔业养护和管理法》及其附带的联邦准则管辖。该法规定,国家海洋渔业服务局确定鱼类种群的基本鱼类生境,并通过理事会渔业管理计划的制定和修订过程,在可行的范围内尽量减少对基本鱼类生境的不利影响。法规和监管指南隐含地假设NMFS和理事会拥有必要的科学信息,可以对所有商业捕捞的物种做出知情的EFH指定,评估对EFH的已实现或潜在威胁,并拥有保护EFH的管理工具。此外,准则中若干重要但含糊不清的术语的解释和执行工作由国家粮食和粮食理事会负责。我们的论点是,这些因素(特别是信息支持不足和监管含糊不清)可以并且正在导致全国范围内不一致和潜在的次优鱼类栖息地管理。随着我们进入一个气候变率增加的时代,这些因素可能在高纬度地区产生不成比例的巨大影响,而高纬度地区的变化预计会更快。在这里,我们简要介绍了基本鱼类栖息地法规的历史,解释了由于科学状况和监管含糊不清而产生的问题,最后讨论了对美国高纬度EFH管理的影响和建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Essential Fish Habitat Regulation in the United States: Lessons for High Latitudes?
Commercial fisheries in the United States are managed by eight regional fisheries management councils operating under the authority of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS, Department of Commerce) and governed by the Magnuson-Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act and accompanying federal guidelines. The Act mandates that NMFS identify essential fish habitat (EFH) for fish stocks and minimize, to the extent practicable, adverse effects to EFH through the councils’ fishery management plan development and revisions process. The statute and regulatory guidelines implicitly assume that NMFS and councils have the scientific information necessary to make informed EFH designations for all commercially harvested species, assess the realized or potential threats to EFH, and have the management tools to protect EFH. Further, the interpretation and implementation of several important, but ambiguous, terms in the guidelines are left to NMFS and the councils. Our thesis is that these factors (specifically, insufficient information support and regulatory ambiguities) can and are resulting in inconsistent and potentially sub-optimal fish habitat management throughout the country. As we enter an era of increased climate variability these factors may be having a disproportionally high impact in higher latitudes where change is expected to be more rapid. Here we provide a brief history of essential fish habitat regulations, explain the issues arising from the state of the science and regulatory ambiguities, and conclude with a discussion of the implications and recommendations for United States high latitude EFH management.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Snjólaug Árnadóttir. Climate Change and Maritime Boundaries: Legal Consequences of Sea Level Rise, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2022, pp. 304. ISBN: 978-1-316-51789-5 Polar Policy in Practice: Tour Guiding in Antarctica Recalcitrant Materialities of a Liminal Ocean: Deconstructing the ‘Arctic Nomos’ Legal Personality in Antarctica The 2018 Judgment by the European Court of Justice on Antarctic MPAS and Its Possible Significance to the Antarctic Treaty System
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1