Tips: Listen for the speaker's own view. Then note each condition the speaker names.

Why the other options are wrong:

• They should exist, but only for small farms without staff for paperwork.: The speaker shares the worry about small farms. But the speaker wants simple access for farmers, not subsidies for small farms only.
• They should exist, but only until the market shows which methods work.: Opponents say the market should decide. The speaker does not link the subsidies to the market.
• They should exist, but only for farms that first prove healthier soil.: Healthier soil is a benefit the speaker hopes for. The speaker never asks farms to prove it first.

Correct Answer: Yields may drop for a time before they get better.

Why this is correct: Supporters say many farmers cannot afford the transition period without help. During that time, yields might dip before they improve.

Tips: Keep the groups apart in your notes. Write each group's reason next to its name.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Droughts have become more common across the Prairies.: The speaker mentions droughts later, as part of the long-term savings. Supporters do not give droughts as the reason for help.
• Small farms lack the staff to apply for programmes.: This is a worry from people who oppose the subsidies. They fear small farms will struggle to apply.
• Banks will not lend them money for new methods.: The neighbour worried about making his loan payments. Nobody says banks refuse to lend.

Correct Answer: these methods clearly benefit the environment.

Why this is correct: Supporters say regenerative farming clearly benefits the environment. The briefing backs this up. It found that soil erosion dropped by nearly 30% on farms using cover crops.

Tips: When a report is mentioned, ask which claim it backs up. Then check what the report itself measured.

Why the other options are wrong:

• healthy soil cuts the need for costly fertilisers.: The speaker talks about fertiliser later, as a long-term saving. The briefing is about soil erosion.
• the change can be costly for farmers at first.: Supporters do say the change is costly at first. But the briefing is about erosion, not costs.
• healthy soil helps farms get through droughts.: The speaker mentions droughts later, with the savings. The briefing does not.

Correct Answer: Understanding, and wary of systems heavy with paperwork.

Why this is correct: The speaker says, I can understand this concern. The speaker adds that we should be cautious about paperwork-heavy systems that favour large agribusinesses.

Tips: Pay attention to the speaker's own words just after they report a concern.

Why the other options are wrong:

• Unconvinced, since critics overlook the long-term savings.: The speaker does say opponents overlook long-term savings. But that comes later and is not the reaction to this worry.
• Understanding, but sure the market is the fairer judge.: The market idea belongs to the opponents. The speaker does not agree with it.
• Alarmed, and ready to give up on subsidies.: The speaker is careful, not alarmed. The speaker still supports subsidies with conditions.

Correct Answer: essential, at least in the early years of the change.

Why this is correct: The neighbour's seed and labour cost thousands of dollars. He said subsidies would give farmers breathing room. From this viewpoint, subsidies are essential, at least in the early years.

Tips: After a personal story, listen for the sentence that says what the story shows.

Why the other options are wrong:

• essential for as long as farmers keep using the methods.: The view is about the early years only. It does not say farmers need help for as long as they use the methods.
• most needed by large farms with high labour costs.: The neighbour is a farmer in rural Ontario worried about his loan. Nothing says large farms need help most.
• useful mainly for farms in Saskatchewan and Manitoba.: Saskatchewan and Manitoba are named only to show how much farming matters. The neighbour farms in rural Ontario.

Correct Answer: About 7 tonnes.

Why this is correct: The briefing says erosion dropped by nearly 30% over five years. Thirty percent of 10 tonnes is 3 tonnes. So the farm would still lose about 7 tonnes.

Tips: Write down any rate you hear. Then work out the answer before you look at the choices.

Why the other options are wrong:

• About 9 tonnes.: This is a drop of only 10 percent. The briefing gives nearly 30 percent.
• About 3 tonnes.: Three tonnes is the amount of the drop. The question asks how much soil the farm still loses.
• About 5 tonnes.: This is a drop of 50 percent. The briefing gives nearly 30 percent.