Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumDrawing Valid Inferences

A 10-year study of five municipal districts revealed that districts implementing mandatory minimum canopy coverage regulations for private developments maintained higher overall tree diversity than districts relying solely on public park planting initiatives. However, among the districts with mandatory regulations, those that permitted developers to pay in-lieu fee payments into a centralized forestry fund rather than planting trees on-site experienced a net decrease in total canopy acreage over the decade. Conversely, every district that prohibited in-lieu fee payments and required on-site planting saw an increase in total canopy acreage, though two such districts recorded a decline in species diversity due to developer reliance on a single resilient maple species.

Based on the information above, which of the following statements must be true? Consider each of the choices separately and select all that apply.

  1. At least one district in the study experienced both an increase in total canopy acreage and a decline in species diversity.Answer
  2. At least one district implementing mandatory minimum canopy coverage regulations experienced a net decrease in total canopy acreage.Answer
  3. C
    Districts relying solely on public park planting initiatives experienced lower net canopy acreage growth than districts requiring on-site planting.

Answer

The statements asserting that at least one district experienced both an increase in canopy acreage and a decline in species diversity, and that at least one district with mandatory regulations experienced a net decrease in canopy acreage, must both be true.
Both valid statements follow unavoidably from explicit passage statements. The claim that at least one district experienced both an acreage increase and a diversity decline is proven by the reference to two districts that required on-site planting (yielding increased acreage) while recording a decline in species diversity. The claim that at least one mandatory-regulation district experienced an acreage decrease is proven by the explicit statement that mandatory-regulation districts permitting in-lieu fees suffered a net acreage decrease.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the premises regarding districts that prohibited in-lieu fee payments.
All districts prohibiting in-lieu fees experienced an increase in canopy acreage, and two of these districts also experienced a decline in species diversity.
This establishes that at least one district exhibited both traits simultaneously.
2
Analyze the premises regarding districts with mandatory regulations.
Districts permitting in-lieu fees fall under mandatory regulations and suffered a net decrease in canopy acreage.
This confirms that at least one mandatory-regulation district experienced a net decrease in canopy acreage.
3
Evaluate unstated claims regarding public park planting initiatives.
The text evaluates public park initiatives on tree diversity only, leaving acreage growth unmentioned.
Claims about public park acreage growth cannot be logically deduced from the passage facts alone.

Key Concept

Drawing Valid Inferences from Quantified and Subset Premises
Rate this question

Topics

Drawing Valid Inferences

More questions from this topic