Ask Question
30 November, 04:43

In one fishing ground off the coast of England, herring were fished so extensively that their numbers dropped 30-fold in 15 years. A fishing ban allowed herring numbers to rebound to the extent that they are now a species of least concern. For a species that is declining, like the herring, why might a scientists want to establish a "no-fishing" zone (like a marine protected area) as a tool for dealing with overfishing? Explain two benefits and list at least one potential limitation of this type of intervention.

+4
Answers (1)
  1. 30 November, 07:51
    0
    A no-fishing zone should be established so that:

    a. the fish would have time to reproduce and create more of its kind

    b. the fish would have time to grow and rich its fully-matured state

    Two benefits of this practice can:

    a. stimulate the balance within the ecosystem through the predator-prey relationship

    b. control the relationship of the environment and its continuous change.

    A limiting potential for this practice is that:

    a. variety of other fishes might also decline because of the increase in number of a particular species took place.
Know the Answer?
Not Sure About the Answer?
Find an answer to your question ✅ “In one fishing ground off the coast of England, herring were fished so extensively that their numbers dropped 30-fold in 15 years. A ...” in 📘 Biology if you're in doubt about the correctness of the answers or there's no answer, then try to use the smart search and find answers to the similar questions.
Search for Other Answers