Q3

[stol1989]

I was between B and E and ultimately chose B. Can someone explain why exactly B wrong.
Here is my version B. Passage says that "Burning also converted mixed stands of trees to homogenous forest, for example the longleaf, SLASH PINE, and scrub oak forests of the Southeastern U.S. Natural fires do account for some of this vegetation, but regular burning clearly EXTENDED and MAINTAINED it."

Q stem asks which one of the following is a type of forest id by author as a PRODUCT of controlled burning in recent times.

Should we interpret product like something that initially
appeared because of controlled burning? In this case B would be incorrect. But if we interpret product in a wider sense, we can also say that maintained slash pine forest is also a product of controlled burning (otherwise it wouldn't persist by present time)
Thank you

[christine.defenbaugh]

Very interesting question, stol1989! You are far from the first person to be frustrated by a question that appears to have multiple answers!

Before we dive in to the particulars, I'll point out that your rationale for (B) would just as easily support (A). How did you eliminate scrub oaks? Think about that for a moment, before you keep reading!







On detail questions such as this, we want to actively mine the passage for information so that our answer choice is directly and explicitly supported.

The question asks us to identify a forest type that is a product of controlled burning in recent times. Notice that this means the controlled burning in question must have occurred in recent times!

SUPPORT

Line 45 introduces the pine-dominant forests of Nicaragua (which are apparently lower elevation than those of Guatemala and Mexico). Later we see that:
"Today, the Nicaraguan pines occur where there has been clearing followed by regular burning, and the same is likely to have occurred in the past" (lines 50-52)

From this we can see that the Nicaraguan pines are a product of controlled burning in recent times!


The Unsupported Temptations

(A) and (B) Both of these forest types appear in lines 37-40, which clearly indicates they were products of controlled burning. So how do we eliminate these answers?

The question asks for forests that are products of controlled burning in recent times - and there's no indication in this sentence when this controlled burning occurred! While the next sentence goes on to suggest that controlled burning 'maintained' the results of natural fires, we still don't know that controlled burning extended all the way until "recent times". We simply have no temporal markers.

(D) and (E) Both these forest types are mentioned in lines 47-50, but they are explicitly noted as natural and prehuman, i.e., not a product of controlled burning.


On detail questions, it pays to be very specific! Please let me know if this completely answers your question!

[ptraye]

how do we know the elevations? i found the correct answer to be Nicaragua, but i kept searching for support for "at low elevations."

answers to question 4 mention elevation too. where is support in the passage about elevations?

thanks.

[maryadkins]

Line 48.

[asafezrati]

"Today, the Nicaraguan pines occur where there has been clearing followed by regular burning, and the same is likely to have occurred in the past" (lines 50-52)
[/list]From this we can see that the Nicaraguan pines are a product of controlled burning in recent times!

I don't understand how the language suggests that the clearings are the product of recent burning. From my point of view, the language says that the current status of these forests is a result of regular burning, which happened in the past, not necessarily the recent past.

The only thing that hints for it being a recent thing is the phrase "the same is likely to have occured in the past."

How does the first part of the sentence suggests that this thing happened recently?

I'm not a native speaker. Your understanding would be appreciated.

[tommywallach]

The word "today" pretty much does it.

-t

[asafezrati]

Todays refers to the situation after a fire. Cant the situation "today" be a result of an ancient fire? Why does the situation today has to be the result of a recent event?