Purple Loosestrife

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct73% picked this

   As it increases in North America, some wildlife populations tend

   Why this is right

   This is phrased so softly ("some wildlife populations tend to decrease") that we want to consider it. It's hard to disagree with this claim, because you'd have to be maintaining that no wildlife populations are negatively impacted by purple loosestrife. We know that Passage A, our alarmist, is going to believe that purple loosestrife is going to decrease at least some wildlife populations. So the real question is whether Passage B would allow for this. (For the record, passage A says that "impacts on wildlife have not been well studied, but serious reductions in waterfowl and aquatic furbearer productivity have been observed). When Passage B assesses purple loosestrife's impact she says this: no bird species other than the canvasback has been identified in the literature as endangered by purple loosestrife (which seems to implicitly acknowledge that the canvasback has been endangered by purple loosestrife). B also says: The impact of purple loosestrife on furbearing mammals is discussed at great length, though none of the species highlighted can be considered threatened. This statement seems to allow for the fact that purple loosestrife is having some negative impact on furbearing mammals, just not so-alarming an impact that it threatens those species. So basically we're picking this answer mainly because of B's reference to the canvasback. While B doesn't outright say, "the canvasback's population is decreasing where loosestrife proliferates", B doesn't push back against the idea that the canvasback has been identified as a species endangered by purple loosestrife (and since her whole agenda is to push back, she would say something if she disagreed). Finally, her last sentence is saying that purple loosestrife threatens millions of lost dollars to the outdoor recreation industry "due to a decline in the production of the wetland resource" and that wetland resource is a call back to "these preferred species such as muskrat and mink".

   Skill tested: Author Opinion · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   73%
2. B

   Too Strong for B14% picked this

   Its establishment in North America has had a disastrous effect on native North American wetland

   Too Strong for B: disastrous Out of Scope for B: vegetation Passage B is trying to tamp down the alarm, so she would not agree to the idea of "disastrous" ecological impact, and passage B never mentions impact on vegetation.

   14%
3. C

   Out of Scope B2% picked this

   It is very difficult to control effectively

   Out of Scope B: herbicides Contradicted in A Passage B never discusses options for controlling loosestrife via herbicides, and Passage A actually says that the herbicide glysophate "has been used successfully to control ti".

   2%
4. D

   Too Strong for B: great blunder8% picked this

   Its introduction into North America was a great

   Passage B is not alarmed by purple loosestrife. She thinks it's only of great concern to people worried about the trapping, hunting, and recreation revenues that could be affected. So she wouldn't sign off on "great ecological blunder".

   8%
5. E

   Unsupported in Both Passages2% picked this

   When it is eliminated from a given area, it tends to return to that

   Neither passage has any remark similar to "once you remove it, it tends to quickly come back". In fact, Passage A acts like if you spot it early and dig it out, you're okay.

   2%