Tips: In discussion questions, listen carefully to the first speaker for the main goal.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Whether to merge Green Peterborough with another conservation group.: Green Peterborough's restoration priorities are discussed; merging the group with another conservation organisation is not proposed.
• Whether to apply for a federal environmental grant.: Funding is discussed only after the main choice. The existing Canada Summer Jobs grant is described as limited; applying for a new federal environmental grant is not the decision under discussion.
• Whether to expand volunteer recruitment for Green Peterborough.: They do not talk about recruiting volunteers as the main goal. Volunteers are mentioned later, not as the decision. Volunteer readiness is a reason for preferring forest work, rather than a proposal to expand recruitment.

Correct Answer: Restored wetlands could help with flooding and water quality as the city updates its stormwater plan.

Why this is correct: The person in the centre supports wetlands because they could improve flooding and water quality alongside the City's stormwater plan.

Tips: Match each speaker to their main concern early in the talk.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Volunteers already have the training needed for wetland projects.: Existing volunteer wetland training is not the benefit stated.
• The Ministry of Natural Resources has pre-approved the permits.: Pre-approved permits are not reported; approvals may take months.
• Wetland restoration is less expensive than forest work.: Wetlands are described later as costlier upfront, not cheaper.

Correct Answer: Reforestation is more straightforward and volunteers already know how to plant trees.

Why this is correct: The person on the right favours forest work because volunteers already know tree planting and can begin quickly if wetland approvals stall.

Tips: Check each option against the reasons the speaker gives.

Why the other options are wrong:

• The provincial government has mandated reforestation in the Ganaraska region.: Mandatory reforestation is not reported.
• Forest restoration does not require any permits under Ontario regulations.: The claim is quick familiar work, not universal exemption from permits.
• Forests deliver quicker measurable benefits than wetlands.: The person in the centre says measurable forest benefits are slower, not quicker than wetlands.

Correct Answer: Tree planting can take decades to show measurable benefits.

Why this is correct: The person in the centre worries about impact because measurable tree-planting benefits can take decades, whereas wetlands have quicker biodiversity and filtration returns.

Tips: Compare phrases often explain why one option is better.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Forest work would conflict with the city's stormwater plan.: Conflict with the stormwater plan is not the forest concern.
• Tree planting could damage existing wildlife habitats.: Damage to existing wildlife habitat is not the stated concern.
• Forests require more expensive equipment than wetlands.: More expensive forest equipment is not discussed.

Correct Answer: The right ecological expertise is secured.

Why this is correct: The person on the left supports wetlands only if the right ecological expertise can be secured; the project cannot simply be improvised.

Tips: Conditions often follow words like but or only if.

Why the other options are wrong:

• The work must be completed before the end of September.: End-of-September completion is not the condition.
• Only volunteers with tree-planting experience may participate.: Restricting participation to people with tree-planting experience is not the ecological-expertise requirement.
• The conservation authority must fully fund the project.: Full conservation-authority funding is not required in this turn.

Correct Answer: The grant is limited and wetlands can be costlier upfront.

Why this is correct: The person on the left says the Canada Summer Jobs grant is limited and wetland work has higher upfront costs.

Tips: Check each option against what the speaker says about money.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Postpone the project until next fiscal year.: Waiting until the next fiscal year is not proposed.
• The Canada Summer Jobs grant can cover the full wetlands project.: Full grant coverage contradicts the limited funding stated.
• Apply for a new federal infrastructure grant.: A new infrastructure grant is not proposed.

Correct Answer: Forest restoration work.

Why this is correct: The compromise keeps forest work as a backup to a smaller wetlands pilot. That leaves switching to forests available if needed, without a specific funding trigger being stated.

Tips: Backup plans usually follow a risk or problem.

Why the other options are wrong:

• A plan to hire professional contractors if volunteer numbers are too low.: Hiring professional contractors for low volunteer numbers is not the backup proposed.
• A plan to reduce the scope of the wetlands pilot by half.: A smaller pilot site is suggested, but reducing its scope by half is not the stated backup activity.
• A plan to extend the project into the winter months if necessary.: Extending work into winter is not the backup proposed.

Correct Answer: Says the main points have been covered and proposes keeping things moving.

Why this is correct: The person in the centre says the main points have been covered and proposes keeping the process moving.

Tips: Listen to the complete closing remark.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Suggests delaying all restoration until the following spring.: A delay until spring is not the closing suggestion.
• Announces forest-only restoration in Ganaraska this fall.: A forest-only final decision is not announced.
• Approves full-scale wetland restoration along the entire creek.: Full-creek restoration is not approved.