Question

In Selection 1, the author includes a claim that the wild horses have Spanish origins. Which statement best delineates the claim? Most evidence suggests that the horses are in fact a native species, supporting the argument that the horses must have actually been in North America for more than 11,000 years. The horses' Spanish orgins have been verified by DNA analysis, and this common ancestry helps support the argument that there is now a serious problem of inbreeding in the horse population. Although the horses' orgins are not actually certain, the claim supports the argument that the horses have been wild on the barrier island for a very long time and should be treated as a native species. There is no evidence to suggest that the horses are actually from Spain, which supports the argument that the horses are recent additions to the island and their range should be limited to protect endangered species.

Answer 1

This question is about the article "Wild Horses as Native North American Wildlife"

Answer:

Most evidence suggests that the horses are in fact a native species, supporting the argument that the horses must have actually been in North America for more than 11,000 years.

Step-by-step explanation:

According to the article, wild horses of Spanish origin were taken to North America with Columbus and his entourage. They deposited these horses in Mexico, on Colombus' second voyage to the continent in 1493. The horses that were brought in at that time were E. caballus, which from where Mexico is today, began to spread across the Great Planices, intermingling in territory of the USA and giving rise to the native species we know today.