Answer:
a. how would an economist explain the decline of the alaska king crab fishery?
According to economist, the decline of the Alaska king crab fishery could be compared to Law of diminshing returns. This simply means that, the optimal fishing point was reached before the fishes available started declining leading to the fishing bust that happened in 1980s.
b. explain two programs you could institute to protect the fishery and still allow some crabbing again.
Fishing Time policy: This program would involve the restriction of the fishing activities carried out in the alaska to a given time frame. For example, from september to december. Rather than fishing always as was done.
Fishing Quantity Policy: This program would in involve the restriction of the quantity of fishes to be gotten in the cook inlet and bristol bay by the fishing companies. For example, each company is expected to take only 50kg worth of fish once a week rather than fishing unlimitedly each day.
c. canadians have been very successful in farming salmon in coastal fiords along the coast of british columbia. why have they been successful with salmon when the crab fishery crashed?
This is because, their are series of policies that tends to guide the farming of salmon in the coastal fiords by the Canadians. And, also, salmon is not as demanding as the King Crab fishes.
Explanation:
Answer: The direct impact of population growth on the water resources management
Explanation:Plan of the country (1966), economic surplus has been taken advantage of
I would rather be poor and be able to do everything. I could get a very good paying job and eventually reach the same wealth as if I was rich in the first place.
Lincoln was elected. Resulting in many changes during the Civil War and the succession of the confederacy
Different cultural attitudes to land ownership might have caused conflict between Native Americans and colonists because of either culture trying to impose their meaning on the other.
<h3>What did Native Americans think of land ownership?</h3>
Native Americans believed that no one owned land as their property but that land was the property of the community. What this meant was that a person might be allowed to use land for a while, but this land will come back to the community.
Colonists on the other hand believed that when they bought land, it was theirs forever until they passed this ownership to someone else. This created conflict with the Natives who did not think they had relinquished control of lands that colonists were on.
Find out more on Native American land perceptions at brainly.com/question/1064732.
#SPJ1
