Question

read this letter from a member of the us congress about a prescribed fire that got out of control. key details - a prescribed burn turned into an out - of - control wildfire covering thirty - two square miles. - the public is concerned because of air quality issues and loss of tourism. - the forest service’s handling of the prescribed burn is questioned. which is the best rebuttal to this anti - burn viewpoint? - air quality is often affected by controlled fires. - tourism is not of great concern to the forest service. - without the controlled fire, the tourist season would not have been affected. - without the controlled fire, more fuel may have built up, leading to greater damage.

Explanation:

The anti-burn viewpoint likely criticizes controlled fires due to the out-of-control incident, air quality issues, and tourism loss. A strong rebuttal would address the purpose of controlled fires: reducing fuel buildup to prevent more severe wildfires. The option stating that without controlled fires, more fuel may build up leading to greater damage directly counters the anti-burn argument by highlighting a larger risk of inaction.

Answer:

D. Without the controlled fire, more fuel may have built up, leading to greater damage.