Reading comp PrepTest 147 · Section 3 · Question 6

Incorrect. (Lines 53-54) Allowing lightning fires to burn under certain conditions might achieve this goal, but allowing all of them to burn risks extensive damage, so this answer is too positive.

Incorrect. (Lines 53-54) Similar to (A), this answer doesn't reflect the conditional nature of the Author's proposal to let these fires burn.

Incorrect. (Lines 53-54) The condition put on allowing the lightning-caused fires to burn in the passage is related to weather, not the age of the forest, so this answer is incorrect.

Correct. Question Type:
Must Be True

Strategy Overview:
Find where this is discussed, reread that section, and then find an answer that lines up with it

Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
This question asks about allowing fires started by lightning to burn, which runs counter to the current practice of fighting every fire. Since it's aligned with the new policy, it must be discussed in Paragraph 3, where that new policy is outlined.

The policy itself starts in Line 40. Starting there, we can see that lightning isn't mentioned until Line 51. There, it states that such fires should be allowed to burn "when the weather is damp enough to reduce the risk of extensive damage." That sets up a condition when these fires should be allowed, so the policy in this question stem of letting all of them burn out is more extreme than the Author is committed to. And in stating that the weather needs to be damp enough to "reduce the risk of extensive damage," it's implied that the weather not being damp enough means there's a risk of extensive damage.

Let's find an answer stating that the policy in this question is too extreme and might result in extensive damage—what every actor in the passage is trying to avoid!

And note that this is a bit of a tricky question because the inference we're anticipating seems to run counter to the main point of the passage—that a new and successful fire management policy should allow some fires to burn. This is why it's important to note caveats, conditions, and concessions made by the Author.

Answer Explanation:
(Lines 53-54) Currently, many forests haven't had fires in 50+ years, so they have a lot of fuel in them. If the lightning-caused fires are allowed to burn when it isn't damp enough to keep them under control, there's a risk of extensive damage. This answer reflects that a policy of letting all such fires burn involves this risk, so it's the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Note how easy it would have been to think that the policy in this question was the same as what the Author proposed in the passage. How can you avoid a misread here? Train yourself to always focus on certainty/force words. Here, the passage talks about "all" of a subset of fires. That word should jump off the page at you, so if it isn't, start reviewing in a way that causes it to be a focus.

Incorrect. The passage doesn't discuss the political feasibility of the Author's proposal.