The collapse of the east coast fishery had several causes.
1. Pollution. Pouring untreated sewage into the east coast waters killed a large number of fish.
2. Habitat loss. Many of the fish use the wetlands and streams as places to lay their eggs and as nurseries for their young. When the meadowlands are filled in they are no longer the nurseries for little fish. Little fish can no longer leave home to grow up to become big fish. Simply because no one saw the tons of little fish produced by the meadowlands every day did not mean they would not miss the tons of big fish they would become as they were eaten and as a few grew into those big fish.
When streams are dammed, Atlantic Salmon and other fishes can not swim upriver to lay their eggs. (Enough were already killed trying to swim upstream in polluted rivers.)
3. Over fishing. When entirely too many big fish are caught, not enough little fish will be produced to replace them. It still takes one large male and one large female fish to produce fertilized eggs. Enough of those must grow up for the fishery to recover. Right now that is difficult.
The collapse of the west coast fishery, particularly in the 1990s and early 2000s, led to the loss of thousands of jobs. Estimates suggest that around 30,000 to 40,000 jobs were directly affected, particularly in coastal communities heavily reliant on fishing. The decline in fish populations, particularly salmon, resulted in significant economic challenges for fishermen, processors, and related industries. The repercussions were felt deeply in local economies, leading to broader social and economic impacts.
The West Coast fishery faces several challenges, including overfishing, habitat degradation, and the impacts of climate change, which alter ocean temperatures and ecosystems. Additionally, regulatory pressures and competition for resources from other industries, such as tourism and coastal development, add strain to sustainable fishing practices. Invasive species and fluctuating fish populations further complicate management efforts, making it difficult to maintain a balance between economic viability and ecological health.
It is on the west coast of the State of Florida, but not on the west coast of the United States.
R. R. Lauth has written: 'The 2000 Pacific west coast upper continental slope trawl survey of groundfish resources off Washington, Oregon, and California' -- subject(s): Catch effort, Fish populations, Fishery resources, Marine fishes, Miller Freeman (Ship), Observations, Trawls and trawling 'The 1996 Pacific west coast upper continental slope trawl survey of groundfish resources off Washington and Oregon' -- subject(s): Observations, Catch effort, Fish populations, Fishery resources, Trawls and trawling 'The 1999 Pacific west coast upper continental slope trawl survey of groundfish resources off Washington, Oregon, and California' -- subject(s): Catch effort, Fish populations, Fishery resources, Marine fishes, Miller Freeman (Ship), Observations, Trawls and trawling 'The 1997 Pacific west coast upper continental slope trawl survey of groundfish resources off Washington, Oregon, and California' -- subject(s): Observations, Catch effort, Fish populations, Fishery resources, Trawls and trawling
The east coast is on the east and the west coast is on the west.
west coast
west coast
west coast its way better
It's the coast on the West
<p><p> Not sure, but may be due to the flow of trade winds from from northeast direction to the southwest direction that ultimately removes the water from the east coast and fresh nutrient comes over the the surface , that increases in the production.
No, it is on the West Coast of United States of America.
Nebraska isn't on the coast, but it is much closer to the west coast.