Which statement best explains why the negative effects the absence of wolves had in Yellowstone National Park got more research funding than the negative effects the absence of bees had on flowers on a neighborhood park?
*
National parks tend to get more funding because more people visit it
Scientists from the area rose awareness about the effects this had on the food chain
Organizations are concerned about the results of the research into Yellowstone
Corporations refuse to fund research for Yellowstone
Scientists from the area rose awareness about the effects this had on the food chain
The statement that best explains why the negative effects of the absence of wolves in Yellowstone National Park received more research funding than the negative effects of the absence of bees on flowers in a neighborhood park is: Scientists from the area raised awareness about the effects this had on the food chain.
The statement that best explains why the negative effects of the absence of wolves in Yellowstone National Park received more research funding than the negative effects of the absence of bees on flowers in a neighborhood park is: Scientists from the area raised awareness about the effects this had on the food chain.
Explanation:
1. National parks tend to get more funding because more people visit it: While it is true that funding for national parks might be higher due to their popularity and the number of visitors they attract, this statement does not specifically address the difference in research funding between the two scenarios mentioned.
2. Scientists from the area raised awareness about the effects this had on the food chain: This statement highlights a crucial factor in obtaining research funding. When scientists effectively communicate the potential impact of a particular issue, such as the absence of wolves in Yellowstone and its effect on the food chain, it creates greater awareness and may attract more funding.
3. Organizations are concerned about the results of the research into Yellowstone: This statement implies that organizations have a vested interest in the research outcomes related to Yellowstone National Park. However, it does not directly explain why the negative effects of wolves in Yellowstone received more funding compared to the negative effects of bees on flowers in a neighborhood park.
4. Corporations refuse to fund research for Yellowstone: This statement suggests that corporations specifically refuse to fund research for Yellowstone National Park. However, without further information, it cannot be generalized as the sole reason for the difference in research funding between the two scenarios.
In summary, the key factor determining why the negative effects of the absence of wolves in Yellowstone received more research funding than the negative effects of the absence of bees on flowers in a neighborhood park is the active involvement of scientists from the area who raised awareness about the impact on the food chain. This effectively highlighted the ecological importance of the issue and likely attracted more funding for research efforts.