rohitgoel15 wrote:
Data from satellite photographs of the tropical rain forest in Melonia show that last year the deforestation rate of this environmentally sensitive zone was significantly lower than in previous years. The Melonian government, which spent millions of dollars last year to enforce laws against burning and cutting of the forest, is claiming that the satellite data indicate that its increased efforts to halt the destruction are proving effective.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the government’s claim?
(A) Landowner opposition to the government’s anti-deforestation efforts grew more violent last year in response to the increased enforcement.
(B) Rainfall during the usually dry 6-month annual burning season was abnormally heavy last year.
(C) Government agents had to issue fines totaling over $9 million to 3,500 violators of burning-and-cutting regulations.
(D) The inaccessibility of much of the rain forest has made it impossible to confirm the satellite data by direct observation from the field.
(E) Much of the money that was designated last year for forest preservation has been spent on research and not on enforcement.
Source : LSAT PrepTest 9
Satellite photographs show lower deforestation rate last year.
The government, which spent millions of dollars last year to enforce laws against burning and cutting of the forest, is claiming that its efforts proved effective.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the government’s claim?
(A) Landowner opposition to the government’s anti-deforestation efforts grew more violent last year in response to the increased enforcement.
The opposition grew more violent in response to increased enforcement. This doesn't mean that enforcement was not effective. Perhaps the govt was able to handle the violence and fewer trees but burnt or cut.
(B) Rainfall during the usually dry 6-month annual burning season was abnormally heavy last year.
The usually DRY burning season saw heavy rainfall last year. This could be the reason for reduced deforestation. Because of rain, burning would have been hampered. Hence it does call into question the Govt's claim.
(C) Government agents had to issue fines totaling over $9 million to 3,500 violators of burning-and-cutting regulations.
Whatever the govt recovered as fine is irrelevant. They enforced the laws and hence issued fines to violators. Perhaps that is why the violators did not burn/cut as much as they did every year before that.
(D) The inaccessibility of much of the rain forest has made it impossible to confirm the satellite data by direct observation from the field.
Doesn't matter whether we can confirm by direct observation. Satellite images show less deforestation.
(E) Much of the money that was designated last year for forest preservation has been spent on research and not on enforcement.
The argument already says: The government, which spent millions of dollars last year to enforce laws against burning and cutting of the forest
So we know that the govt spent millions on enforcing and that is what it is talking about. It may have designated billions on forest preservation and most of it might have been spent on research. But we know that the govt spent million on enforcing and that is that. It was what percentage of total designated to forest preservation is irrelevant.
Answer (B)
_________________
Karishma Bansal - ANA PREP
*SUPER SUNDAYS!* - FREE Access to ALL Resources EVERY Sunday
REGISTER at ANA PREP
(Includes access to Study Modules, Concept Videos, Practice Questions and LIVE Classes)
YouTube Channel
youtube.com/karishma.anaprep