Which of the following is a benefit of having native/adapted vegetation in a development project?

Having native or adapted vegetation in a development project significantly enhances local biodiversity. This is because native plants have evolved to thrive in their specific environments, making them better suited to support the local ecosystem. They often provide essential habitat and food sources for a wide variety of wildlife, including birds, insects, and other organisms, fostering a healthy and diverse ecosystem.

In contrast, options that suggest a reliance on more resources or higher costs, such as requiring more water irrigation or increasing maintenance costs, contradict the advantages of using native plants. Native vegetation typically requires less irrigation since they are adapted to local climate conditions, making them more resilient to drought and reducing the need for excessive watering. Additionally, native plants often demand less maintenance over time as they are familiar with the local soil and weather conditions, which lowers overall upkeep costs. Lastly, the introduction of native plants is intended to counteract, not attract, invasive species, contributing to a weaker ecosystem balance when non-native plants are introduced. Therefore, the choice emphasizing the enhancement of local biodiversity aligns closely with the ecological benefits observed with native and adapted plants in development projects.