Examkin

Question

Difficulty: EasyCross-Text Connections: Perspective Comparison

Text 1
Many marine ecologists advocate for the reintroduction of sea otters as the primary method to restore degraded coastal kelp forests. Sea otters are key predators of sea urchins, which feed voraciously on kelp. When sea otter populations decline, sea urchin populations explode, leading to barren seafloors. By controlling the urchin population, otters allow kelp forests to recover rapidly, creating crucial habitats for diverse marine organisms. Consequently, conservationists argue that funding should be heavily directed toward relocating otters to regions where they have been extirpated.

Text 2
Reintroducing sea otters can temporarily reduce sea urchin numbers, but this approach overlooks the primary drivers of modern kelp forest decline. Factors such as rising ocean temperatures, marine heatwaves, and agricultural runoff represent much more severe and persistent threats to kelp health than urchin grazing. Without mitigating these underlying environmental stressors, newly established kelp beds will remain highly vulnerable to collapse. Therefore, dedicating limited conservation resources exclusively to otter reintroduction is an incomplete strategy that fails to address the root causes of ecosystem degradation.

Based on the passages, how would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the claim in Text 1 that conservation funding should be heavily directed toward relocating sea otters?

  1. A
    By claiming that sea otters do not actually consume sea urchins in coastal ecosystems.
  2. B
    By suggesting that conservationists should focus on relocating different predators to control urchins.
  3. By arguing that this allocation of funding fails to address the primary threats to kelp ecosystems.Answer
  4. D
    By agreeing that otter relocation is the best way to protect kelp from rising ocean temperatures.

Answer

By arguing that this allocation of funding fails to address the primary threats to kelp ecosystems.
The correct answer is correct because the author of Text 2 states that devoting limited conservation resources exclusively to otter reintroduction is an incomplete strategy that ignores more severe threats like rising ocean temperatures, marine heatwaves, and agricultural runoff. Thus, the author of Text 2 would view the funding proposal as failing to address the primary threats to the kelp ecosystem.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the claim in Text 1 regarding conservation funding.
Text 1 claims that funding should be heavily directed toward relocating sea otters to help restore kelp forests.
To establish the specific premise that the author of Text 2 is responding to.
2
Analyze the author's argument in Text 2 regarding otter reintroduction and resource allocation.
Text 2 argues that focusing exclusively on otter reintroduction is an incomplete strategy because it ignores primary threats like rising temperatures and runoff.
To determine how the author of Text 2 would view the funding proposal.
3
Compare the two perspectives to find the correct relationship.
The author of Text 2 would argue that spending funds on otter relocation does not address these primary environmental threats.
To select the option that best represents this critical perspective.

Key Concept

Cross-Text Connections: Perspective Comparison
Estimated Time:1m 0s
Rate this question

Topics

Cross-Text Connections: Perspective Comparison

More questions from this topic