A location is proposed to be developed for a new coal mine. There is an endangered species of plant thought to be located throughout the specific location where the coal mine will be sited, and also throughout the area surrounding it. As part of an Environmental Impact Assessment, a consultant is contracted to collect data on the abundance of the endangered plant species. The consultant counts the numbers of individual plants of the endangered species within the location targeted for the proposed mine site; she also counts the number of these plants found at several other, separate locations in the surrounding area.

1. At each location, plants were counted by walking around and then choosing spots that seemed likely places where the plant would be found. What is the problem with this sampling method? What effect will this problem have on the reliability of estimates of the abundance of the plant? (3 marks)
2. The consultant is able to count numbers of the endangered plant species at each location only once because inadequate time was provided to gather further information. However, the consultant claims the data are nevertheless valid for drawing conclusions about the abundance of the plant throughout the whole area. What further information would you need to know in order to assess whether that claim is true? (2 marks)
3. The consultant compares the abundance of the endangered plant species at the proposed coal mine location to the average of all the other locations she visited using a statistical test. The test returns a probability (p-value) of 0.20. The consultant concludes that there are no differences between locations and that therefore their impact site is just the same as the surrounding area. Disregarding the answer you gave at part (i) for this question (i.e. don't consider the issues you considered there to answer this question), can you have complete confidence in this conclusion? Why or why not? (2 marks)