As the United States experiences a sharp increase in population, the country is finding it harder to provide for its citizens without having to sacrifice the environment. Many companies in the food and farming industry, like yours, are negating to institute more environmentally friendly energy sources and practices in order to earn higher profits. These decisions are not only detrimental to the environment. But they are also to the health and well-being of Americans. Although Tyson Foods has posed as a company that produces affordable foods that people can feel safe consuming, your company has historically been a large contributor to global warming. Tyson Foods has recently taken steps to address its negative impacts on climate change, but these nominal gestures do not go far enough to combat the widespread emission of greenhouse gasses, notably methane, a common byproduct of cattle ranching. This study was commissioned by the American Farmland Trust, a nonprofit organization with a mission of transforming public policy to address soil erosion and degradation, and of advocating for a holistic approach to soil regeneration and sustainable practices for farming and ranching. Takes a comprehensive view of the historical and present-day practices of Tyson Foods. We will conduct research individually about Tyson Foods, your sustainability goals and practices, EPA regulations for the food industry, and how Tyson's dominant presence in the meat-processing industry influences your operations. After gathering secondary sources, we will compare our findings and examine how well Tyson is complying with EPA regulations, how these compliances compare to standards in the meat industry, and what steps you've taken and the progress you've made to improve your environmental impact. Sources will include the following: - Peer-reviewed academic journals - Trade publications and other agricultural industry periodicals - Interviews with Tyson Foods executives - E.P.A. impact studies Our findings will show whether Tyson Foods has been taking proper steps to protect the environment, and whether these changes in the company's operations are at a scope large enough to make a significant impact on climate change. 3) In terms of audience, what is the main flaw of this executive summary? a. The report was commissioned by American Farmland Trust, but the writers are addressing this document to Tyson Foods. b. The writers use a negative tone that seems to critique Tyson Foods in a biased manner-as if the researchers had a political agenda before cherrypicking their data to support their preconceived ideas. c. Climate change is a complicated issue that is caused by many environmental factors, but the researchers seem to suggest that Tyson Foods is solely to blame for the rise in global temperatures. 4) In terms of purpose, what is the main flaw of this executive summary? a. The researchers provide broad categories of research sources, but they don't specify any publications or scientific studies that they plan to investigate. b. The document is missing an important component of this genre: key findings of the research. c. Although this report is being written to the Legislative Action Committee of American Farmland Trust, the researchers do not suggest any political initiatives that could be taken against polluters like Tyson Foods