At a recent meeting on environmental threats off the coast of the state of Maine, most participants favored uniform controls on the quality of food fed to salmon species in fish farms located along the coast of the state. Such controls were overwhelmingly supported without regard to whether or not specific environmental damage could be linked to a particular type of food being used. What must, of course, be shown, in order to mitigate the risk of excessively restrictive controls, is that
a) all agreed upon controls that are uniform in nature will be implemented without any delay
b) all fish food that will be the subject of controls are known to actually cause environmental damage off the coast of Maine
c) the meeting participants favoring uniform controls are primarily from an industry that competes with the salmon farmers
d) all of the chemicals that are ingredients in some of the controlled substances are known to cause environmental damage
e) the environmental damage that has historically been caused by the dangerous fish foods is not reversible in the foreseeable future
OA after some discussion
[spoiler]Why is D not correct ? I narrowed down to B & D.[/spoiler]
a) all agreed upon controls that are uniform in nature will be implemented without any delay
b) all fish food that will be the subject of controls are known to actually cause environmental damage off the coast of Maine
c) the meeting participants favoring uniform controls are primarily from an industry that competes with the salmon farmers
d) all of the chemicals that are ingredients in some of the controlled substances are known to cause environmental damage
e) the environmental damage that has historically been caused by the dangerous fish foods is not reversible in the foreseeable future
OA after some discussion
[spoiler]Why is D not correct ? I narrowed down to B & D.[/spoiler]
