Anisotropic expansion and SNIa: An open issue

We review the appropriateness of using SNIa observations to detect potential signatures of anisotropic expansion in the Universe. We focus on Union2 and SNLS3 SNIa datasets and use the hemispherical comparison method to detect possible anisotropic features. Unlike some previous works where nondiagonal elements of the covariance matrix were neglected, we use the full covariance matrix of the SNIa data, thus obtaining more realistic and not underestimated errors. As a matter of fact, the significance of previously claimed detections of a preferred direction in the Union2 dataset completely disappears once we include the effects of using the full covariance matrix. Moreover, we also find that such apreferred direction is aligned with the orthogonal direction of the SDSS observational plane and this suggests a clear indication that the SDSS subsample of the Union2 dataset introduces a significant bias, making the detected preferred direction unphysical. We thus find that current SNIa surveys are inappropriate to test anisotropic features due to their highly non-homogeneous angular distribution in the sky. In addition, after removal of the highest in homogeneous sub-samples, the number of SNIa is too low. Finally, we take advantage of the particular distribution of SNLS SNIa sub- sample in the SNLS3 data set, in which the observations were taken along four different directions. We fit each direction independently and find consistent results at the 1 sigma level. Although the likelihoods peak at relatively different values of Omega(m), the low number of data along each direction gives rise to large errors so that the likelihoods are sufficiently broad as to overlap within 1 sigma. (C) 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http:// creativecommons. org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Restricted Access vs. Open Access Methods of Management: Toward More Effective Regulation of Fishing Effort

This paper gives an overview of the economic rationale for limited entry as a method of fishery management and discusses general advantages and disadvantages of license limitation and catch rights as the two primary methods of restricting access to marine fisheries. Traditional open-access methods of regulation (e.g., gear restrictions, size limits, trip limits, quotas, and closures) can be temporarily effective in protecting fish populations, but they generally fail to provide lasting biological or economic benefits to fishermen because they do not restrict access to the fishery. The general result of regulation with unrestricted access to a fishery is additional and more costly and complex regulations as competition increases for dwindling fishery resources. Regulation that restricts access to a fishery in conjunction with selected traditional methods of regulation would encourage efficient resource usage and minimize the need for future regulatory adjustments, provided that enforcement and monitoring costs are not too great. In theory, catch rights are superior to license limitation as a means of restricting access to a fishery.