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.

Question

Biology

Fellow

3 March, 11:20

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.

+2

Answers (1)

Know the Answer?

Felicity Christian · Answer 1

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.