Editorial: Almost every year the Smithfield River floods the coastal fishing community of Redhook, which annually spends $3 million on the cleanup. Some residents have proposed damming the river, which would cost $5 million but would prevent the flooding. However, their position is misguided. A dam would prevent nutrients in the river from flowing into the ocean. Fish that now feed on those nutrients would start feeding elsewhere. The loss of these fish would cost Redhook $10 million annually.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the editorial’s argument?
(A) The Smithfield River should be dammed to prevent flooding.
(B) Nutrients from the Smithfield River are essential to the local fish population.
(C) Damming the Smithfield River is not worth the high construction costs for such a project.
(D) For Redhook to build a dam on the Smithfield River would be a mistake.
(E) The Smithfield River floods cost Redhook $3 million every year.
Solution (Posted on 16th):
The best answer is D. A is a clear fact mentioned in the argument. It also does not reflect the main concern – loss in fishing. B makes a wrong claim mentioned or implied nowhere. C speaks a point that is not mathematically right as per the argument. Building the dam is still a good proposition for the compared to losing $3 million each year due to flooding. E is a mere fact, not a total reflection of the arguments’ main point.
No comments:
Post a Comment