PrepTest 154, Section 2, Question 5
Salmon farmer: Farm-raised salmon is preferable to wild(54 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(8 more words not shown)
- AFarmed salmon are(16 more words not shown)
- BThough some wild(13 more words not shown)
- CMost people who(19 more words not shown)
- DLimits on the(20 more words not shown)
- EWild salmon are(15 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Available all year, consistent quality, and a lower price: those sound like reasons someone might choose farmed salmon. They aren't necessarily the only considerations. We might also wonder about nutrition or other differences. But the farmer's main argument moves to a different benefit: protecting wild salmon.
The proposed chain makes sense at first. More people buy farmed salmon, fewer want wild salmon, and fewer wild salmon are caught. More are then left to survive and reproduce. That would be good for the wild population.
But does farming salmon affect wild salmon in some other way?
What if maintaining the farms required catching wild salmon to stock them? That could offset the benefit of catching fewer for consumers. Or what if the farms polluted places where wild salmon live? These are possibilities to test, not facts we've been given about salmon farming.
What we’re looking for
For the weaken question, that's where I'd look: some other effect of farming that harms the wild population. We don't have to deny the lower price or year-round availability. We need to challenge the claim that switching to farmed salmon benefits the wild fish.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
This gives us a harmful connection I hadn't specifically predicted. To feed the farmed salmon, people catch large quantities of small fish from places where wild salmon try to feed. So expanding farming can take food away from the wild population the farmer claims it will help.
Leaving more wild salmon uncaught is less reassuring if we're also removing their food. A doesn't say every wild salmon will starve or prove the population must shrink. It gives us a concrete reason to doubt the simple story that more farming means more wild salmon living and multiplying freely.
- B
Some wild salmon being better doesn't contradict farmed salmon having consistent quality. More importantly, the farmer's developed argument concerns the wild population's ecological benefit, not a claim that every farmed fish tastes better than every wild fish. This comparison doesn't identify a harmful effect on the wild population.
- C
Whether consumers notice a taste difference doesn't tell us whether farming protects wild salmon. People could regard the two as tasting the same while the ecological claim was either right or wrong. We need information about the effect on the fish population.
- D
This explains why wild salmon became more expensive. It doesn't show that choosing farmed salmon harms the wild population or fails to benefit it. The cause of a price difference is separate from the environmental effect the farmer claims for the switch.
- E
Potential harm to people eating pollutants is a different issue from harm to wild salmon populations. If anything, this could give consumers another reason to choose farmed salmon. It doesn't challenge the ecological argument that increasing demand for farmed salmon helps wild fish.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.