Question

in the following paragraph, the authors contrast deregulation and prohibition in order to _____. imagine a situation in which deer hunting in a public forest is unregulated. each hunter is free to harvest as many deer as possible. as a result of unlimited hunting, the deer population could be depleted to the point of endangerment... on the other hand, if hunting were prohibited entirely, the deer herd might grow so large that there would not be enough food in the forests to support it. in extreme cases, such as that of the reindeer of st. paul island, the population could grow unchecked until it crashed due to starvation. —friedland, relyea, courard - hauri, environmental science: foundations and applications, w. h. freeman. demonstrate that both extremes have harmful consequences show that prohibition is the more sensible option show that deregulation is the more sensible option demonstrate that both extremes have positive effects

Explanation:

The paragraph describes how unregulated deer - hunting (deregulation) can deplete the deer population, and how a complete hunting prohibition can cause the deer herd to grow too large and face starvation. This shows that both extreme approaches (deregulation and prohibition) have harmful consequences.

Answer:

A. demonstrate that both extremes have harmful consequences