Open AccessThis article is
- freely available
Response to Comments of Ben Gunneberg
Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, Clemson University, P.O. Box 340317, Clemson, SC 29634-0317, USA
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 18 July 2010 / Accepted: 17 August 2010 / Published: 18 August 2010
Abstract: An unreferenced statement on page 608 is challenged as being incorrect. FSC and PEFC are competitors and issues on the differences between the programs are often arguable. We do agree that a small portion of the statement could have been more clearly stated, but the intent of the statement was essentially correct. The original article contained 80 references and not every sentence could be referenced. We include 18 additional references below to strengthen and clarify our statement.
Article StatisticsClick here to load and display the download statistics.
Notes: Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Cite This Article
MDPI and ACS Style
Straka, T.J.; Layton, P.A. Response to Comments of Ben Gunneberg. Sustainability 2010, 2, 2621-2625.
Straka TJ, Layton PA. Response to Comments of Ben Gunneberg. Sustainability. 2010; 2(8):2621-2625.
Straka, Thomas J.; Layton, Patricia A. 2010. "Response to Comments of Ben Gunneberg." Sustainability 2, no. 8: 2621-2625.