In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes litt

According to a survey in Mason City, water sports swimming, boating and fishing were ranked as the favorite recreational activities by the residents of Mason City. The author here notes that, however, the Mason river is not being used for these pursuits. He implicitly states the reason for this as number one- the river is dirty and the water is smelly which makes it unsuitable for the abovementioned activites and number two- that the city park development agency spends little to maintain the existing facilities which makes it unattractive to the local residents. The author, based on this reasoning, concludes that after the river is cleaned, the city park department must spend more in this years budget to improve the facilities in order to attract the residents. Let us examine the assumptions and its consequences one by one.

The Mason river undoubtely is not used for the water sport activities. The author states here that it is not used because its water is dirty and smelly. Here the author assumes that there are no other facilities in the city which provide for these recreational activities. It is possible that the residentes carry out these activities elsewhere in the city, for e.g.- a big clean swimming pool with all modern amenities like a restaurant and a movie theatre, or a lake in the city with good boats for boating and fishing. These facilities might keep the residents attracted and hence the lack of need of the river. The assumption of the author can be considered true if any further evidence is provided such as there are no facilities in the city or in the next city for such recreational activities.

Moreover, the author also assumes that since the city park department is not spending enough money on the aintainence, the residents are not attracted or interested in using the facilities. This assumption cannot be warranted until a time history of the use of river is provided.For e.g the river was once used for the recreational activities and there were enough users of these \facilities. But over time the river might have gained the commerical interest of the city developers and a port might have developed on the river. At the same time a new facility for recreational activities would have developed by the developers elsewhere.This might have caused the desuetude of the recreational activities on the river side.

The assumption can be warranted if the author provided if some additional data is provided. For e.g. the survey which suggest that the city dwellers did not use the available riverside recreational facilities due to poor maintanence. In conclusion, wihtout additional data the argument of the author seems fallacious.