Text 1
Proponents of "assisted migration"—deliberately moving plant species to higher latitudes or elevations to escape warming climates—argue that active human intervention is necessary to prevent mass extinctions. Ecological researcher Dr. Aris Thorne contends that natural migration rates of slow-growing tree species are far outpaced by current climate shifts. Without targeted relocation programs, key forest species face severe habitat fragmentation and ultimate decline. Thorne suggests that the risks of inaction far outweigh the potential ecological disruptions of introducing species to new ranges.
Text 2
Ecologist Dr. Elena Vance urges caution regarding assisted migration, emphasizing the unpredictability of novel ecosystems. Vance points out that introducing non-local tree species can lead to unforeseen competition with native flora and alter soil chemistry, potentially harming established communities. Furthermore, she argues that focusing resources on relocations diverts critical funding from preserving existing habitats. Rather than manually redistributing species, Vance suggests, conservationists should prioritize reinforcing native habitats and connecting corridors to facilitate self-directed migration.
Based on the texts, how would Vance (Text 2) most likely characterize Thorne’s claim in Text 1 that the risks of inaction outweigh the potential disruptions of introducing species to new ranges?
- AAs a valid concern that aligns with her own recommendation to redirect funding toward manually moving endangered plants.
- BAs an unsupported assumption that overestimates the speed at which climate change is altering forest habitats.
- As a view that understates the ecological risks of species relocation and ignores more sustainable conservation alternatives.Cevap
- DAs a strategy that should be applied exclusively to fast-growing plant species rather than trees.