Between 1996 and 2005, the gray wolf population in Minnesota grew nearly 50 percent; the gray wolf population in Montana increased by only 13 percent during the same period. Clearly, the Minnesota gray wolf population is more likely to survive and thrive long term.Environmentalist
: But the gray wolf population in Montana is nearly 8 times the population in Minnesota; above a certain critical breeding number, the popula tion is stable and does not require growth in order to survive.
The environmentalist challenges the government representative's argument by doing which of the following?
(A) introducing additional evidence that undermines an assumption made by the representative
(B) challenging the representative's definition of a critical breeding number
(C) demonstrating that the critical breeding number of the two wolf populations differs significantly
(D) implying that the two populations of wolves could be combined in order to preserve the species
(E) suggesting that the Montana wolf population grew at a faster rate than stated in the representative's argument
Please explain your reasoning for your answers. Will post OA soon