Editorial: Almost every year the Smithfield River floods the coastal fishing community of Redhook, which annually spends $3 million on the cleanup. ████ █████████ ████ ████████ ███████ ███ ██████ █████ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ███ █████ ███████ ███ █████████ ████████ █████ ████████ ██ ██████████ █ ███ █████ ███████ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ████ ███████ ████ ███ ██████ ████ ████ ███ ████ ██ █████ █████████ █████ █████ ███████ ██████████ ███ ████ ██ █████ ████ █████ ████ ███████ ███ ███████ █████████
The editorial argues that the proposal to dam the river is misguided. Building the dam would have negative consequences. The dam would prevent the flow of nutrients, causing fish to feed elsewhere. The loss of the fish would cost $10 million annually (which is much more than the cost of the cleanup from flooding that the dam was built to prevent).
The conclusion is the editorial’s refutation of the residents who propose damming the river: “their position is misguided.”
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ████ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████████ █████████
The Smithfield River ██████ ██ ██████ ██ ███████ █████████
Nutrients from the ██████████ █████ ███ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ████ ███████████
Damming the Smithfield █████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ████ ████████████ █████ ███ ████ █ ████████
For Redhook to █████ █ ███ ██ ███ ██████████ █████ █████ ██ █ ████████
The Smithfield River ██████ ████ ███████ ██ ███████ █████ █████