Akela wrote:
New evidence indicates that recent property development bordering a national park has not adversely affected the park 's wildlife. On the contrary, a comparison of the most recent survey of the park's wildlife with one conducted just prior to the development shows that the amount of wildlife has in fact increased over the intervening decade. Moreover, the park's resources can support its current wildlife populations without strain.
+1 for
A.
Stimulus :Tow different surveys of the park’s wildlife were conducted before the recent property development bordering a national park . The latter states that the amount of wildlife in the park actually increased over the intervening decade. Hence, the property development did not hurt the park’s wildlife.
(A) While both surveys found the same species of animals in the park, the more recent survey found greater numbers of animals belonging to each species.
--> Correct, considering each species of wildlife and the change within the species shows that the number has increased for wildlife for each species, hence strengthener (B) The more recent survey was taken in the summer, when the diversity of wildlife in the park is at its greatest.
--> Weakener(C) Migration of wildlife into the park from the adjacent developing areas has increased animal populations to levels beyond those that the resources of the park could have supported a decade ago.
--> Irrelevant(D) The most recent techniques for surveying wildlife are better at locating difficult-to-find animals than were older techniques.
--> Weakener(E) The more recent survey not only involved counting the animals found in the park but, unlike the earlier survey, also provided an inventory of the plant life found within the park.
--> IrrelevantHence,
A.
_________________
The few, the fearless !Thanks 