Question

review the claim and the two pieces of evidence.
goats can be effective for removing weeds in many areas.
evidence a: a small graphic design company in oregon rented goats to remove weeds on its grounds. the companys owner noted that the goats \devoured\ the english ivy that was harming native plants.
evidence b: it has been widely demonstrated that goats are enthusiastic eaters who can thoroughly remove stubborn invasive plant species. city and state governments across the u.s. have reported success with using goats for weed control.
why is evidence b stronger than evidence a?
evidence a does not directly support the claim. it does not show that goats are effective at removing weeds.
evidence a is anecdotal. it represents the experience of only one small company.

Explanation:

Evidence A is a single, isolated case from one small business, while Evidence B relies on widespread, demonstrated success across multiple U.S. city and state governments. Anecdotal evidence (like Evidence A) is weaker because it is limited to one specific instance, whereas Evidence B provides broader, more generalized proof that supports the claim about goats being effective weed removers.

Answer:

Evidence A is anecdotal. It represents the experience of only one small company.