Also in 2025 Practice Test B English, question 38.
Passage Using Fire to Keep a Prairie Healthy
Using Fire to Keep a Prairie Healthy
Inside the 40,000-acre Joseph H. Williams Tallgrass Prairie Preserve in northern Oklahoma, herds of bison roam on the scenic land that is home to hundreds of different species of plants and animals. While one of the greatest threats to the prairie is wildfire, the use of controlled fires is actually an effective way to protect this idyllic landscape.
Fires that are started by lightning or other natural circumstances are inevitable, and the results can be disastrous. However, hundreds of years ago the American Indian people who inhabited the Great Plains area between Minnesota and Texas realized that these fires could also be helpful. The bison in the area seemed to prefer grazing on tender new grass on the recently burned land rather than on grass in the unburned areas. The American Indian people began to deliberately burn areas of land for bison to graze on, which enticed the herds away from the people’s crops.
Today conservationists at the Tallgrass Prairie Preserve and farmers in the Great Plains continue to use controlled burns for land management. Intentionally burning a portion of land can dramatically improve the quality of the vegetation that regrows there. The fires burn away weedy undergrowth and help limit the overcrowding of shrubs and trees in the burn area, creating less competition for water and nutrients. Additionally, the process of burning excess plant matter adds nitrogen, an essential element for plant growth, to the soil.
One common target of controlled burns at the preserve and the surrounding area is the invasive red cedar tree. A single red cedar tree can consume up to 40 gallons of water per day, taking this vital resource away from other plant life. These tall trees also cast shade that prevents sunlight from reaching the plants beneath them. The fast-growing red cedar trees tend to crowd out prairie grasses, the primary food source for wild and domestic animals that make the prairie their home. An imbalance in one component of the prairie’s ecosystem affects the entire web of life. Controlled burns help maintain this ecosystem’s delicate balance.
Of course, these controlled fires are intended to burn only a portion of an area. A total burn, which is a risk with an uncontrolled wildfire, would destroy all wildlife as well as the crops farmers plant for income. The key to using controlled fires is knowing which areas of land to burn and when. Conservation experts at the preserve employ the “patch-burn” approach, meaning they rotate which portion of land is burned each year. They study the land to find out which areas would most benefit from being burned, and then they arrange about a dozen burns over one-third of the land. This patch burning contains the fire within a specific area and allows animals in the burn area to safely relocate. The following year, conservationists will burn a different section of the preserve, while the land burned the previous year regrows healthier than before.
Researchers have tracked and studied the variety of plant species and animals that live on the preserve, and their studies show that the patch-burn approach has restored biodiversity to the area by promoting the growth of species that were at risk of being crowded out. The patch-burn system is so successful that the conservationists at the preserve provide training to prairie farmers about conducting controlled burns on their own land. Burning land to make it healthy may seem counterintuitive, but strategic controlled fires have helped the prairie sustain life for hundreds of years and, with careful management, will continue to do so.

Question
With which statement would the author most likely agree?
- AIt is important to explain the purposes and the risks of controlled burns to the people living near a proposed burn area.
- BIt is necessary to thoroughly examine a particular region in order to plan and execute a successful controlled burn.
- CMonitoring animals’ reactions after a controlled burn on the prairie is a minor part of scientists’ research.
- DConservationists should consider the helpful aspects of invasive species before executing a controlled burn.
Show the answer
Correct answer: B
The question asks with which statement the author of the passage would most likely agree.
A. Incorrect. In paragraph 5, the author states that “patch burning contains the fire within a specific area and allows animals in the burn area to safely relocate,” and paragraph 6 states that conservationists “provide [important] training to prairie farmers about conducting controlled burns on their own land.” However, the author does not explicitly take a position about the importance of explaining the purposes and the risks of controlled burns to the people living near a proposed burn area. Therefore, the evidence in the passage does not strongly suggest that the author would agree with this statement.
B. CORRECT. In paragraph 5, the author points out that conservationists “study the land to find out which areas would most benefit from being burned, and then they arrange about a dozen burns over one-third of the land” and “rotate which portion of land is burned each year” so that animals, such as bison, can “safely relocate.” Therefore, the author would most likely agree that it is necessary to thoroughly examine a particular region in order to plan and execute a successful controlled burn.
C. Incorrect. The author of the passage would be unlikely to agree that monitoring animals’ reactions after a controlled burn on the prairie is a minor part of scientists’ research. In paragraph 5, the author explains that patch burning “allows animals in the burn area to safely relocate” and that conservationists “burn a different section of the preserve” each year to ensure that animals have an abundant area to graze while other areas are being burned.
D. Incorrect. According to the information in paragraph 4, conservationists commonly target invasive red cedar trees because they are tall trees that “crowd out prairie grasses, the primary food source for wild and domestic animals that make the prairie their home.” Since the focus is on the harm that the invasive red cedar can cause, the author would be unlikely to agree that conservationists should consider the helpful aspects of invasive species before executing a controlled burn.
Question analysis
This point-of-view question asks which statement the author of the prairie-burning article would most likely agree with. Students infer the author's position from details spread through the passage, and since some choices sound like sensible advice in general, each must be traced back to what the article actually supports.
- Grade level
- Grade 7 reading and task
- Compared with grade 7
- At grade 7 Inferring what an author would agree with is typical grade 7 work on point of view. The choices draw on different paragraphs, and the author's views are stated fairly plainly, so careful checking settles it without a long chain of inference.
- Estimated difficulty
- Straightforward: two steps or one careful reading.
- Thinking it demands
- Depth of knowledge 2, skills and concepts · mainly analyze
- What makes it hard
- Every choice must be checked moderate
- Reading between the lines minor
- Evidence
- Answered from several paragraphs or stanzas
- Reading level
- Passage: about grade 11, 598 words; question and choices: about grade 11, 81 words.
- Students, last 30 days
- Not enough answers yet to show (it takes 10).
Why it is hard, traps and wrong answers (shows the answer)
Why it is hard
The right statement is close to a paraphrase of paragraph 5, where the experts study the land before choosing where to burn, so careful readers settle this quickly. The risk is a statement that sounds wise in general: explaining a burn’s purposes and risks to its neighbors is good practice, but the article never raises it. The other two contradict the text, which values research on animals and treats red cedars only as a harm.
Every choice must be checked moderate Choosing the answer
The statements touch different parts of the article, research in paragraph 6, invasive species in paragraph 4 and safety in general, so each must be traced to what the author says, if anything. (Embretson & Wetzel, 1987)
Reading between the lines minor Working it out
The author never gives an opinion on planning burns; agreement must be inferred from the report that experts “study the land” before arranging about a dozen burns. (Graesser, Singer & Trabasso, 1994; Kintsch, 1998)
Strategy: For each statement, find the paragraph it relates to and ask whether the author says something close to it, says the opposite, or says nothing; choose only a statement the text backs.
Traps
- Outside knowledge: A choice is plausible in the real world but not supported by this text.
- Twists what the text says: Uses the text's topic and ideas but changes what it says: who did it, how much, when, or why.
The wrong answers, classified
A Outside knowledge (King et al., 2004; Recht & Leslie, 1988)
Agrees with a sensible safety practice, telling neighbors about a burn’s purposes and risks, but the article discusses training farmers, never informing people who live near a burn.
C Twists what the text says (King et al., 2004)
Notices that the article says more about land than about animals and calls watching them minor, though paragraph 6 reports researchers tracking the preserve’s animals and finding biodiversity restored.
D Outside knowledge (King et al., 2004; Recht & Leslie, 1988)
Imagines a balanced view in which invasive species have helpful sides, though paragraph 4 presents the red cedar only as a threat that drinks water, blocks sunlight and crowds out grasses.
Working it out, step by step
Figure out what the question asks
This question asks which statement the author would most likely agree with. The author doesn’t state an opinion on these ideas outright. So check each statement against what the passage says. Pick the one the passage backs up.
Find what the author stresses
Paragraph 5 says “The key to using controlled fires is knowing which areas of land to burn and when.” Next it says the experts “study the land to find out which areas would most benefit from being burned.” Only after that do they plan “about a dozen burns over one-third of the land.” A dozen means 12.
Put it in your own words
The author calls knowing where and when to burn “the key.” A key is the most important part. The experts study the land before they plan a single burn. So the author thinks careful study comes first. A burn works only when people know the land well.
Check each choice
- A is wrong. This sounds like good advice. But the passage never talks about warning neighbors before a burn.
- B is right. It matches paragraph 5. The experts study the land, then plan the burns.
- C is wrong. Paragraph 6 says researchers “tracked and studied” the animals. The author treats that research as important, not minor.
- D is wrong. Paragraph 4 shows the invasive red cedar only as harmful. Invasive means spreading where it doesn’t belong.
Watch out: A is tempting because it is wise in real life. But you must pick what this author would agree with, based on the passage.
Choose the answer
The author shows the experts studying the land before they plan. Execute here means carry out. So the answer is B: “It is necessary to thoroughly examine a particular region in order to plan and execute a successful controlled burn.”
Why this answer and not the closest wrong one
A is the closest wrong answer, because explaining a burn to the neighbors is sensible. But the passage never raises it. B matches what paragraph 5 actually says: the experts “study the land” before they plan the burns.
More questions like this
The original DOE question

The passage “Using Fire to Keep a Prairie Healthy” as printed (page 41)
