Large wildfires are among the most serious natural disasters in the

Question

Large wildfires are among the most serious natural disasters in the world, causing billions of dollars of damage and dozens, if not hundreds, of deaths each year. Perhaps surprisingly, most fire departments in wildfire-prone areas cite safety as their reason for choosing not to extinguish small brush fires. These small fires, they say, can help clear the dry brush and debris that fuels the large, catastrophic fires.

Which of the following, if true, provides the best justification for the fire departments’ choice to not extinguish small brush fires?

A. Only some small brush fires expand to become large, catastrophic fires.

B. Most fire departments would be unable to extinguish every small brush fire without having to hire additional staff.

C. There is no means other than fire for clearing dry brush and debris in wildfire-prone areas.

D. The most common causes of small brush fires are carelessly-discarded cigarette butts and poorly-extinguished campfires, each of which is easily preventable through fire education.

E. Small brush fires enrich the soil beneath them, leading to fertile land for agriculture and natural beauty.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects: 
 
   Data Sufficiency Butler 
   Problem Solving Butler  
   Sentence Correction Butler  
   Reading Comprehension Butler  
   Integrated Reasoning Butler

bv8562 · Answer

Bunuel  Why is C the correct answer?

Posted from my mobile device

Score-Quest · Answer

Let's evaluate each option in relation to the fire departments' choice:

A. Only some small brush fires expand to become large, catastrophic fires.
This statement suggests that not all small fires become large fires. However, it doesn't directly justify the choice of allowing small fires to burn to clear dry brush and debris.
 
 B. Most fire departments would be unable to extinguish every small brush fire without having to hire additional staff.
This provides a logistical reason for not extinguishing every small fire, but it doesn't directly address the safety rationale mentioned in the passage.
 
 C. There is no means other than fire for clearing dry brush and debris in wildfire-prone areas.
This directly supports the fire departments' claim. If fire is the only way to clear the dry brush and debris that fuel large fires, then allowing small fires to burn would be a proactive measure to prevent larger, more dangerous fires.

D. The most common causes of small brush fires are carelessly-discarded cigarette butts and poorly-extinguished campfires, each of which is easily preventable through fire education.
While this provides information about the causes of small fires, it doesn't directly justify the choice to let them burn to clear dry brush and debris.
 
 E. Small brush fires enrich the soil beneath them, leading to fertile land for agriculture and natural beauty.
While this is a potential benefit of small fires, it doesn't directly address the safety rationale of preventing larger fires by clearing dry brush and debris.

Bunuel · Answer

VERITAS PREP OFFICIAL SOLUTION:

On this Strengthen question, note the potentially paradoxical logic the fire departments use. Their concern is safety (an important clue the testmakers leave in the sentence that outlines the departments' actions), so why would they choose not to extinguish small fires?

Choice (A) is inconsistent with the idea of safety. Even "only some" small fires turn into catastrophic fires, failing to extinguish them risks or sacrifices at least some safety. And that is certainly not a reason to actively choose not to extinguish them in the name of safety.

Choice (B) also falls victim to the notion of safety. If the fire departments had cited cost as their reason, then (B) totally works - hiring more firefighters to fight these small fires would certainly come at a cost. But if their cited concern is safety, the reason that "we would have to hire more people and spend more money" is not consistent with their stated goals/priorities.

Choice (C) is correct. If letting the small fires burn is the only known way to eliminate the brush that could fuel a larger fire, then choosing to not extinguish the fire works with the idea of safety - that decision is made to help prevent larger fires from having sufficient fuel to be catastrophic.

Choice (D) is incorrect in large part because of its timeline. The departments are choosing not to extinguish fires that are already burning, so relying on education to prevent new fires from starting isn't a valid reason - that solution will do nothing to help the existing fires.

And choice (E) simply misses the mark of safety - sure, the fires might leave a beautiful, productive landscape but if safety is a cost of that then the fire departments are violating their stated reason for the choice not to extinguish the fire.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Large wildfires are among the most serious natural disasters in the

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Large wildfires are among the most serious natural disasters in the

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards