Answer:
B. Keep it, because it draws on evidence from the third paragraph to make a more persuasive case for why the North Cascades are a good place to resettle the goats.
Explanation:
Answer B
Correct. The underlined phrase shows how the environment of North Cascades National Park—the presence of salt licks and the relative lack of hikers—makes it less likely that the safety concerns discussed in paragraph 3 will arise in the North Cascades. With easier access to salt that does not come from humans, the goats will pose less of a threat to humans. By making this logical connection between the evidence in paragraph 3 and the passage’s case for the necessity of the goat relocation program, the writer makes the argument more persuasive.
<h3>5. True</h3><h3>6. False</h3><h3>7. True</h3><h3>8.True</h3><h3>9. False</h3><h3>10. False</h3>
They did not have the materials
Answer:
New GPP 
kcal/m2
Explanation:
Given -
Number of new trees planted 
Before planting new trees, the gross annual primary productivity of a particular wetland ecosystem 
kcal/m2
The increase in gross primary productivity 
%
The new GPP will be equal to
Existing GPP + 
% of Existing GPP
Substituting the given values, we get -
New GPP kcal/m2
