BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Tiger Attack

Expert replies
by snehit » Tue May 26, 2009 8:12 am
A decade after a logging operation in India began cutting down trees in a territory that serves as a sanctuary for Bengal tigers, the incidence of tigers attacking humans in nearby villages has increased by 300%. Because the logging operation has reduced the number of acres of woodland per tiger on average from 15 acres to approximately 12 acres, scientists have theorized that tigers must need a minimum number of acres of wood land in order to remain content.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most strengthen the scientists' hypothesis?

A] In other wildlifeareas in India where the number of acres of woodland per tigers remains at least 15 acres, there has been no increase in the number of tiger attacks on humans.

B] Before logging operation began, there were many fewer humans living in the area.

c] The largest number of acres per tiger before the logging operation began was 32 acres per tiger in one area of sactuary, whereas the smallest number of acres per tiger after the logging operation was 9 acres.

D] Other species of wild animals have begun competing with Bengal tigers for the dwindling food supply.

E] The bengal tiger has become competely extinct in other areas of Asia.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Re: Tiger Attack

by amazonviper » Tue May 26, 2009 8:18 am
snehit wrote:A decade after a logging operation in India began cutting down trees in a territory that serves as a sanctuary for Bengal tigers, the incidence of tigers attacking humans in nearby villages has increased by 300%. Because the logging operation has reduced the number of acres of woodland per tiger on average from 15 acres to approximately 12 acres, scientists have theorized that tigers must need a minimum number of acres of wood land in order to remain content.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most strengthen the scientists' hypothesis?

A] In other wildlifeareas in India where the number of acres of woodland per tigers remains at least 15 acres, there has been no increase in the number of tiger attacks on humans.

B] Before logging operation began, there were many fewer humans living in the area.

c] The largest number of acres per tiger before the logging operation began was 32 acres per tiger in one area of sactuary, whereas the smallest number of acres per tiger after the logging operation was 9 acres.

D] Other species

IMO the SC content is as follows

Loss of Acres per tiger --> Increase attack rate (from the scientist's opinion).

So the only option that is strengthening the conclusion is option A.
Let me know the OA please. :-)
Join the discussion

Re: Tiger Attack

by vinaynp » Tue May 26, 2009 8:47 am
snehit wrote:A decade after a logging operation in India began cutting down trees in a territory that serves as a sanctuary for Bengal tigers, the incidence of tigers attacking humans in nearby villages has increased by 300%. Because the logging operation has reduced the number of acres of woodland per tiger on average from 15 acres to approximately 12 acres, scientists have theorized that tigers must need a minimum number of acres of wood land in order to remain content.

Which of the following statements, if true, would most strengthen the scientists' hypothesis?

A] In other wildlifeareas in India where the number of acres of woodland per tigers remains at least 15 acres, there has been no increase in the number of tiger attacks on humans.

B] Before logging operation began, there were many fewer humans living in the area.

c] The largest number of acres per tiger before the logging operation began was 32 acres per tiger in one area of sactuary, whereas the smallest number of acres per tiger after the logging operation was 9 acres.

D] Other species of wild animals have begun competing with Bengal tigers for the dwindling food supply.

E] The bengal tiger has become competely extinct in other areas of Asia.
A) It is the only one that strengthens the hypothesis.
Join the discussion

by caprion » Tue May 26, 2009 10:16 pm
IMO A

whats the OA
Join the discussion

by Domnu » Wed May 27, 2009 12:16 pm
IMO, A. Everything else seems very much out of scope or irrelevant.
Have you wondered how you could have found such a treasure? -T
Join the discussion

by snehit » Thu May 28, 2009 9:41 pm
Yup. Correct answer is A only. Who answer A are correct
Join the discussion

by Musicolo » Fri May 29, 2009 1:48 am
easy one-A
Join the discussion

by nicolette » Sun May 15, 2016 3:00 pm
Option A looks good than other answers
Join the discussion