Monarch butterflies spend the winter hibernating

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope4% picked this

   The amount of forest land suitable for monarch butterfly hibernation that is not currently used by

   How much Other habitat exists for monarchs has nothing to do with whether or not tourists are endangering the monarch population in this habitat. Maybe could say, "The tourists aren't endangering the monarchs -- after all, there's a large amount of forest land suitable for monarchs that's not currently used by monarch", but that would be twisting the meaning of this conclusion. The conclusion isn't saying that the monarchs are now an endangered species with little available habitat. The evidence is saying that woodcutters are decreasing the available habitat, and that tour groups are undermining the ability of the monarchs to survive in the area where they are.

   4%
2. B

   Out of Scope3% picked this

   The amount of wood cut each year by woodcutters in forests used by monarch

   Sort of like (A), this is asking us to numerically quantity the threat of habitat loss from woodcutters. We don't need to be further convinced that woodcutters are encroaching on the habitat of monarchs. We accept the background evidence that woodcutters are a threat to the butterflies. We're only trying to evaluate whether local tour groups, walking through the butterflies' habitat, stomping on small shrubs, are also a threat to local populations of monarchs.

   3%
3. C

   Out of Scope14% picked this

   The amount of plant life trampled by the tourists that is not necessary to the

   Since we're trying to assess whether or not the tourists are endangering survival by trampling on necessary plant life, it's not really relevant whether the tourists are also trampling on plant life that doesn't matter to monarchs.

   14%
4. D

   Out of Scope6% picked this

   The proportion of the trees cut down by the woodcutters each year that are cut in the forests used

   Just like (A) and (B), this is trying to quantify the threat of the woodcutters, when all we care about is assessing the threat of the of the tour groups. We wouldn't care if 13% of the woodcutters' business came from monarch forests vs. 47% vs. 84%. No matter what share of the woodcutters' business it represents, it still represents a threat to monarch habitat.

   6%
5. E

   Correct73% picked this

   The proportion of hibernating monarch butterflies that fall off

   Why this is right

   If 90% of monarchs fall off trees, then they will need small shrubs to survive. Since tourists are trampling most of these shrubs, this would strengthen the idea that the tour groups are endangering the monarch population. Meanwhile, if only 5% of monarchs fall off trees, then 95% of the monarchs aren't worried about those small shrubs, so whatever the tour group may be doing to the shrubs would not be endangering the monarch population. This possible answer would weaken. If we find an answer choice where one possible answer to it strengthens and an opposite type of answer to it weakens, we've found our correct answer.

   Skill tested: Evaluate · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   73%