Biodiv Sci ›› 2010, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (1): 100-107. DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1003.2010.100
• Management • Previous Articles
Yujing Zhou1,2, Enyuan Fan2,*(), Baoxiang Liu2, Gengfei Feng2, Ying Huang2
Received:
2009-08-23
Accepted:
2009-11-15
Online:
2010-01-20
Published:
2010-01-20
Contact:
Enyuan Fan
Yujing Zhou, Enyuan Fan, Baoxiang Liu, Gengfei Feng, Ying Huang. A comparison of FAO and CITES aquatic species management regimes[J]. Biodiv Sci, 2010, 18(1): 100-107.
缔约国 Member countries | 捕捞量 Capture production (t)* | 建议列入CITES附录的提案 Proposals to include new aquatic species CITES Appendices | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
鼠鲨(附录II) Lamna nasus (Appendix II) | 白斑角鲨(附录II) Squalus acanthias (Appendix II) | 锯鳐科(附录I) Pristidae (Appendix I) | 欧洲鳗鲡(附录II) Anguilla anguilla (Appendix II) | 巴厘岛天使鱼(附录II) Pterapogon kauderni (Appendix II) | 波纹唇鱼(附录II) Cheilinus undulatus (Appendix II) | ||
秘鲁 Peru | 7,017,491 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
美国 USA | 4,859,872 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
印度尼西亚 Indonesia | 4,759,080 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
日本 Japan | 4,186,980 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |
智利 Chile | 4,168,461 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | – | – |
印度 India | 3,855,467 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | – | – |
俄罗斯 Russian | 3,284,126 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | – | – |
泰国 Thailand | 2,776,295 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | – |
菲律宾 Philippines | 2,318,984 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | – | – |
挪威 Norway | 2,255,513 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | – | 1 |
缅甸 Myanmar | 2,006,790 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
越南 Viet Nam | 1,959,900 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | – | – |
韩国 Korea | 1,749,929 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | – | – |
孟加拉 Bangladesh | 1,436,496 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
冰岛 Iceland | 1,327,063 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | – | 1 |
墨西哥 Mexico | 1,300,000 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | – | – |
马来西亚 Malaysia | 1,296,335 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | – | – |
阿根廷 Argentina | 1,182,185 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | |
加拿大 Canada | 1,063,033 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | – | – |
FAO的建议 FAO’s suggestion | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | |
投票结果 Voting results | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
Table 1 Voting results of large-scale fish harvesting countries on proposals to include new aquatic species in CITES appendices I and II
缔约国 Member countries | 捕捞量 Capture production (t)* | 建议列入CITES附录的提案 Proposals to include new aquatic species CITES Appendices | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
鼠鲨(附录II) Lamna nasus (Appendix II) | 白斑角鲨(附录II) Squalus acanthias (Appendix II) | 锯鳐科(附录I) Pristidae (Appendix I) | 欧洲鳗鲡(附录II) Anguilla anguilla (Appendix II) | 巴厘岛天使鱼(附录II) Pterapogon kauderni (Appendix II) | 波纹唇鱼(附录II) Cheilinus undulatus (Appendix II) | ||
秘鲁 Peru | 7,017,491 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
美国 USA | 4,859,872 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
印度尼西亚 Indonesia | 4,759,080 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
日本 Japan | 4,186,980 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | |
智利 Chile | 4,168,461 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | – | – |
印度 India | 3,855,467 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | – | – |
俄罗斯 Russian | 3,284,126 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | – | – |
泰国 Thailand | 2,776,295 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | – |
菲律宾 Philippines | 2,318,984 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | – | – |
挪威 Norway | 2,255,513 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | – | 1 |
缅甸 Myanmar | 2,006,790 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
越南 Viet Nam | 1,959,900 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | – | – |
韩国 Korea | 1,749,929 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | – | – |
孟加拉 Bangladesh | 1,436,496 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | – | – |
冰岛 Iceland | 1,327,063 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | – | 1 |
墨西哥 Mexico | 1,300,000 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | – | – |
马来西亚 Malaysia | 1,296,335 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | – | – |
阿根廷 Argentina | 1,182,185 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | |
加拿大 Canada | 1,063,033 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | – | – |
FAO的建议 FAO’s suggestion | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | |
投票结果 Voting results | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
排名 Rank | 进口国 Importers | 出口国 Exporters |
---|---|---|
1 | 日本 Japan | 中国 China |
2 | 美国 USA | 挪威 Norway |
3 | 西班牙 Spain | 泰国 Thailand |
4 | 法国 France | 美国 USA |
5 | 意大利 Italy | 丹麦 Denmark |
6 | 中国 China | 加拿大 Canada |
7 | 德国 Germany | 智利 Chile |
8 | 英国 UK | 越南 Viet Nam |
9 | 丹麦 Denmark | 西班牙 Spain |
10 | 韩国 Korea | 荷兰 Netherlands |
Table 2 The top 10 importers and exporters of aquatic products in the world
排名 Rank | 进口国 Importers | 出口国 Exporters |
---|---|---|
1 | 日本 Japan | 中国 China |
2 | 美国 USA | 挪威 Norway |
3 | 西班牙 Spain | 泰国 Thailand |
4 | 法国 France | 美国 USA |
5 | 意大利 Italy | 丹麦 Denmark |
6 | 中国 China | 加拿大 Canada |
7 | 德国 Germany | 智利 Chile |
8 | 英国 UK | 越南 Viet Nam |
9 | 丹麦 Denmark | 西班牙 Spain |
10 | 韩国 Korea | 荷兰 Netherlands |
[1] | Butterworth DS (2000) Possible interpretation problems for the current CITES listing criteria in the context of marine fish species under commercial harvest. Population Ecology, 42, 29-35. |
[2] | CITES (1994) Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13): Criteria for amendment of Appendices I and II adopted at the ninth meeting of the Conference of the Parties. Fort Lauderdale, United States of America, 7-18 November 1994. http://www.cites.org/eng/res/all/09/E09-24R13.pdf[accessed 2010-1-29]. |
[3] | CITES (2007a) CoP14 Doc. 62 annex1 adopted at the fourteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties. The Hague, Netherlands, 3-15 June 2007. http://www.cites.org/eng/cop/14/doc/E14-62.pdf[accessed 2010-1-29]. |
[4] | CITES (2007 Conf.14.2: CITES strategic vision: 2008-2013 adopted at the fourteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties. The Hague, Netherlands, 3-15 June 2007. http://www.cites.org/eng/res/all/14/E14-02.pdf[accessed 2010-1- 29]. |
[5] | Fan XG (樊祥国), Zhou YJ (周宇晶), Liu BX (刘宝祥), Feng GF (冯庚菲), Fan EY (樊恩源) (2008) Analysis and countermeasure on proposals for aquatic species in CITES. Biodiversity Science (生物多样性), 16, 516-524. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[6] | FAO (2001) COFI/2001/6: Review of the CITES listing criteria for species exploited by fisheries in marine and large freshwater bodies adopted at Twenty-forth Session of the Committee on Fisheries. Rome, Italy, 26 February-2 March 2001. http://www.fao.org/docrep/MEETING/003/X8772E.HTM[accessed 2010-1-29]. |
[7] | FAO (2003) Terms of reference for ad hoc expert advisory panel for assessment of proposals to CITES adopted at the twenty-fifth session of the Committee on Fisheries. Rome, Italy, 24-28 February. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a1143e/a1143e.pdf[accessed 2010-1-29]. |
[8] | FAO (2004a) Report of the Expert Consultation on Legal Issues Related to CITES and Commercially-Exploited Aquatic Species. Rome, Italy, 22-25 June 2004. http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5807e/y5807-e00.HTM[accessed 2010-1- 29]. |
[9] | FAO (2004b) Report of the Expert Consultation on Implementation Issues Associated with Listing Commercially- Exploited Aquatic Species on CITES Appendices. Rome, Italy 25-28 May 2004. http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5751e/y5751e00.HTM[accessed 2010-1-29]. |
[10] | FAO (2005) Report of the Expert Consultation on the Implementation of the FAO International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks. Rome, Italy, 6-8 December 2005. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/009/a0523e/a0523e00.pdf.[accessed 2010-1-29]. |
[11] | Wang S (汪松), Xie Y (解焱) (2004) China Species Red List (中国物种红色名录). Higher Education Press, Beijing. (in Chinese) |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||
Copyright © 2022 Biodiversity Science
Editorial Office of Biodiversity Science, 20 Nanxincun, Xiangshan, Beijing 100093, China
Tel: 010-62836137, 62836665 E-mail: biodiversity@ibcas.ac.cn