Question

Alejandro's boss asked him what he thinks would be best in the situation. Is Alejandro's suggestion of chemical treatment feasible?

1) Yes, it is a confined area and the landowner is willing to pay for the treatment.
2) No, chemical treatment works best on larger areas with infestations.
3) Yes, chemical treatments are the only possible option.
4) No, chemical treatments would have too much of an impact on the local forest.

Answer 1

Alejandro's suggestion of chemical treatment is feasible for a confined area with funding available from the landowner. Chemical control has been effective in specific cases, but it must be carefully managed to avoid resistance and environmental impact.

Step-by-step explanation:

In evaluating whether Alejandro's suggestion of chemical treatment is feasible, we need to consider various factors such as the size of the area, the landowner's willingness to bear the cost, the effectiveness of the treatment, and the potential impact on the environment. Based on the information provided, it seems that chemical treatment can be a feasible option. This is because it is a confined area where the landowner is willing to pay for the treatment, suggesting that the costs of chemical application are not a deterrent. Furthermore, the effectiveness of chemical control has been documented for specific cases such as the Indian house crow and water hyacinth in Florida, where it has been used alongside mechanical methods to manage pest populations.

However, chemical treatment must be carefully managed to avoid possible resistance development and non-target impacts. Chemical pest management can be adapted to local scales and combined with other methods to reduce the overall environmental disruption. Hence, taking all factors into account, Alejandro's suggestion of chemical treatment is feasible (Option 1), as long as it is part of a comprehensive and ecologically sensitive pest management strategy.