You are given a background paragraph that describes one or more causal or qualitative relationships such as a relationship in economics or a scientific law and a story that makes use of the concepts or the relationship described in the provided paragraph. You are also given a question about the story that requires an understanding of the relationship described in the background paragraph and the story. You need to come up with an answer to the given question; the answer will be a span from either the question or the story. In order to correctly answer the given question, you need to understand the relationship mentioned in the background paragraph and should be able to use it to understand that in the story. Your answer can not consist of any word that is not mentioned in any of these: the background paragraph, the story, or the question. You can directly copy and paste a span from the story or the question while answering the given question.

Example Input: Background Paragraph: A dilution effect is seen when animals living in a group "dilute" their risk of attack, each individual being just one of many in the group. George C. Williams and W.D. Hamilton proposed that group living evolved because it provides benefits to the individual rather than to the group as a whole, which becomes more conspicuous as it becomes larger. One common example is the shoaling of fish. Experiments provide direct evidence for the decrease in individual attack rate seen with group living, for example in Camargue horses in Southern France. The horse-fly often attacks these horses, sucking blood and carrying diseases. When the flies are most numerous, the horses gather in large groups, and individuals are indeed attacked less frequently. Water striders are insects that live on the surface of fresh water, and are attacked from beneath by predatory fish. Experiments varying the group size of the water striders showed that the attack rate per individual water strider decreases as group size increases. 
Story: Mike was visiting the African Savannah. One animal that interested him most was the African Buffalo. He noticed that the buffaloes would usually live in a large herd, often exceeding few hundreds. He noted that as case A. But sometimes the buffaloes would live in a small herd. He noted that as case B. Interestingly, there are incidents when an aggressive male buffalo would live by itself. He noted that as case C. 
Question: In which case the group would get more benefit as a whole, case A or case B?
Example Output: case B.

Example Input: Background Paragraph: One of the most adverse impacts of poor waste management, especially municipal waste, is the incidence and prevalence of diseases such as malaria and respiratory problems, as well as other illnesses through the contamination of ground water. Biomedical wastes pose great danger in Bangladesh too as a report estimated that 20% of the biomedical waste is "highly infectious" and is a hazard since it is often disposed of into the sewage system or drains.[6]  Such poor sanitation has serious consequences for the health of the residents and a report suggests that "most of the child mortality could be related with this problem".[7]  With regards to the living standards, solid waste leads to blockage in the drainage system which leads to flooding in the streets. Consequently, mosquitoes and bad odour are among the negative impacts resulted.[7]. 
Story: Calgary has just installed a new waste management system in the city, and has been writing new laws about how biomedical research should be properly disposed of. Detroit on the other hand, just passed a law that allows dumping of medical waste in the sewage system, and has cut funding to it's waste management system. 
Question: Which city probably has a lower chance of contaminated ground water?
Example Output: Calgary.

Example Input: Background Paragraph: Ammonia toxicity is believed to be a cause of otherwise unexplained losses in fish hatcheries. Excess ammonia may accumulate and cause alteration of metabolism or increases in the body pH of the exposed organism. Tolerance varies among fish species. At lower concentrations, around 0.05 mg/L, un-ionised ammonia is harmful to fish species and can result in poor growth and feed conversion rates, reduced fecundity and fertility and increase stress and susceptibility to bacterial infections and diseases. Exposed to excess ammonia, fish may suffer loss of equilibrium, hyper-excitability, increased respiratory activity and oxygen uptake and increased heart rate. At concentrations exceeding 2.0 mg/L, ammonia causes gill and tissue damage, extreme lethargy, convulsions, coma, and death. Experiments have shown that the lethal concentration for a variety of fish species ranges from 0.2 to 2.0 mg/l.During winter, when reduced feeds are administered to aquaculture stock, ammonia levels can be higher. Lower ambient temperatures reduce the rate of algal photosynthesis so less ammonia is removed by any algae present. Within an aquaculture environment, especially at large scale, there is no fast-acting remedy to elevated ammonia levels. Prevention rather than correction is recommended to reduce harm to farmed fish and in open water systems, the surrounding environment. 
Story: Woodland had two nearby fish hatcheries. Pine hatchery had great result the past few years because they found a way to reduce ammonia water toxicity. Spruce hatchery has big ammonia toxicity problems and hadn't find a way to remediate them. 
Question: Which hatchery found more fish with altered metabolisms?
Example Output:
Spruce.