#24 - Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[lemonade42]

I understand the importance of "sometimes there is no more effective means of controlling agricultural pests than giving free rein to its natural predators". However, doesn't "sometimes" give a vague percentage of instances? For example, couldn't it refer to <50% of times or >50% of times? So that's why I keep on hesitating on the idea that the author would rather use predators than pesticides. So that's why I hesitated on eliminating (D). Can you explain what I'm doing/thinking wrong and explain why (D) is wrong in more detail?

Thank you!

[Luke Haqq]

Hi lemonade42!

This question asks us for a statement with which the author of the passage would most likely agree. Answer choice (D) states, "If an insecticide can effectively control pest populations as well as predator populations, then it should be used instead of predators to control pest populations."

I'm not seeing anywhere in the passage where the author endorses use of insecticides. Pesticides aren't discussed at all in the first two paragraphs. They are discussed in the third and fourth paragraphs, but in neither case is the author endorsing use of pesticides over use of predators. So the passage does include the author suggesting that use of natural predators may be warranted (as with the first lines of the passage that you quoted), but it doesn't include the author specifically endorsing pesticides, and definitely doesn't include the author endorsing use of pesticides over using natural predators.