Final answer:
The expectation is a decreased fish population due to subsidizing fuel for fishing vessels, as it would reduce costs, increase fishing efforts and lead to overfishing and reduced fish numbers.
Step-by-step explanation:
If a fishery is managed by open access and the government decides to subsidize fuel for fishing vessels, you would expect a decreased fish population as the steady-state outcome. The subsidy would lower the cost of fishing, encouraging more vessels to go out to sea and increase their fishing efforts. This increased pressure on the fish populations can lead to overfishing, a common problem when managing common resources, resulting in a decreased number of fish. This is counter to the principle of sustainability, which aims to ensure the long-term viability of species.
Moreover, heavy fishing and subsidies can lead to overcapitalization of fisheries, where more resources are spent on capturing fish than the value of the fish caught. It can also upset marine ecosystems, potentially leading to a scenario where previously dominant species become ecologically insignificant, which in turn has broader impacts on other species. Government regulations, such as those creating marine protected areas and fishing limits, are essential to prevent these outcomes and ensure the sustainability of fisheries.
In contrast to subsidies, some policies that could support small fishing villages while protecting fish populations include the creation of dedicated access privileges for small scale fisher communities and reducing overall fishing effort.