The statement that shrimp aquaculture has a large "ecological footprint" primarily refers to the environmental impact and resource use required to support shrimp farming. Among the options given, the most relevant points related to this concept are:
-
A hectare of shrimp cage typically requires an area of ecosystem support many times as large as the cage itself. This highlights the significant amount of resources and ecosystem health required to sustain shrimp farming.
-
It is usually carried out by a ranching procedure, which is more environmentally damaging than pond- or cage-rearing. This implies the practices used can have detrimental ecological effects.
However, the other statements about the potential to replace natural shrimp supplies and converting coastal mangroves, while related to shrimp aquaculture, do not directly express the meaning of having a large ecological footprint.
Therefore, while some of the individual statements could be seen as correct in a broader context, the most direct explanation of the term "ecological footprint" relates to the resource and environmental impact and not necessarily the overall potential or suitability for shrimp farming.
Thus, the answer to whether "All of the above answers are correct" can be nuanced, but primarily the most significant aspect is the ecological impact in relation to resource use (the support area for shrimp cages). However, if your course or study material suggests that all statements are meant to relate to the ecological footprint, you might lean towards All of the above answers are correct.
1 answer