PrepTest 114

Incorrect. This answer is about restoring agricultural techniques, whereas the conclusion recommended restoring the land to an "uncultivated" state, which by definition is untouched by agricultural techniques.

Incorrect. Cost effectiveness is never mentioned in the stimulus.

Incorrect. Similar to (B), there's no mention of economic consequences. Additionally, the Environmentalist is in favor of restoring biodiversity.

Incorrect. The Environmentalist argues a return to an era where there were many more bison than there are currently, so she argues for more than merely preserving the current bison.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Valid

Question Type:
Main Point

Stimulus Summary:
Bison vs. Cattle:
(1) Cattle require a lot of upkeep for 50m
(2) Bison require little upkeep for 30-70m
(3) They provide about the same amount of meat
Therefore - Returning land to an uncultivated state could help the environment without hurting meat production

Answer Anticipation:
Going through this stimulus, we can identify several things that will help us find the main point, but we can also use that to help with future questions!

The opening line talks about something that has already happened. While there is a little bit of an opinion in stating that the ecosystem has been destroyed, the rest of the argument doesn't talk about that destruction, so this is background.

It then moves to a discussion of numbers. Such fact-based statements are almost always premises of arguments.

After that, it starts a sentence with, Since, telling us that we're being presented with a premise that's going to lead into a conclusion (but potentially an intermediate conclusion, not the main point). Here, however, the conclusion part of the sentence ("returning as much land . . . ") is the end of the stimulus, so it must be the main point.

That statement is also a prediction and soft recommendation for what should be done, or at least the outcome that can be expected if a certain course of action is followed. Such predictions are almost always the main point of an argument that features one, so we've identified our main point—returning the land to an uncultivated status can restore biodiversity while allowing for sufficient meat production.

Answer Explanation:
This answer restates the concluding line of the stimulus, which is supported by the rest of the stimulus and represents the Environmentalist's opinion about what can/should be done.

Key Takeaway:
Predictions—especially those that are made as soft recommendations—are almost always the main point of an argument that features one.