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

Redeem

zimbabwe

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

zimbabwe

by thephoenix » Fri Apr 09, 2010 10:22 pm
If the ivory trade continues, experts believe, the elephant will soon become extinct in Africa, because poaching is rife in many areas. A total ban on ivory trading would probably prevent the extinction. However, the country of Zimbabwe-which has virtually eliminated poaching within its borders and which relies on income from carefully culling elephant herds that threaten to become too big-objects to such a ban. Zimbabwe holds that the problem lies not with the ivory trade but with the conservation policies of other countries.
Which one of the following principles forms a logical basis for Zimbabwe's objection to a ban?
(A) International measures to correct a problem should not adversely affect countries that are not responsible for the problem.
(B) Freedom of trade is not a right but a consequence of agreements among nations.
(C) Respecting a country's sovereignty is more important than preventing the extinction of a species.
(D) Prohibitions affecting several countries should be enforced by a supranational agency.
(E) Effective conservation cannot be achieved without eliminating poaching.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Fri Apr 09, 2010 10:27 pm
pls tell what the q stem is actually asking to find out....
IMO Zimbabwe's reasoning for ban is that the problem lies not with the ivory trade but with the conservation policies of other countries....and in order to support this IMO E is correct as it says that Effective conservation cannot be achieved without eliminating poaching......so in place of banning ivory trade those country should eliminate paoching at first place .....
but as per OA i am wrong
I wud appreciate if anyone can expain where i am wrong and y the correct ans is correct over E
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:35 pm
thephoenix wrote:pls tell what the q stem is actually asking to find out....
IMO Zimbabwe's reasoning for ban is that the problem lies not with the ivory trade but with the conservation policies of other countries....and in order to support this IMO E is correct as it says that Effective conservation cannot be achieved without eliminating poaching......so in place of banning ivory trade those country should eliminate paoching at first place .....
but as per OA i am wrong
I wud appreciate if anyone can expain where i am wrong and y the correct ans is correct over E
Phenix bhai,

IMO [spoiler]A!![/spoiler]

The question stem asks for "find a option that tries to strengthen Zimbabwe stand against objection to ban"?

please let me know If my answer is correct or not!!
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:38 pm
Phenix bhai,

IMO A!!

The question stem asks for "find a option that tries to strengthen Zimbabwe stand against objection to ban"?
OA is A
cud u pls ans my query
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:48 pm
thephoenix wrote:If the ivory trade continues, experts believe, the elephant will soon become extinct in Africa, because poaching is rife in many areas. A total ban on ivory trading would probably prevent the extinction. However, the country of Zimbabwe-which has virtually eliminated poaching within its borders and which relies on income from carefully culling elephant herds that threaten to become too big-objects to such a ban. Zimbabwe holds that the problem lies not with the ivory trade but with the conservation policies of other countries.
Which one of the following principles forms a logical basis for Zimbabwe's objection to a ban?
(A) International measures to correct a problem should not adversely affect countries that are not responsible for the problem.
(B) Freedom of trade is not a right but a consequence of agreements among nations.
(C) Respecting a country's sovereignty is more important than preventing the extinction of a species.
(D) Prohibitions affecting several countries should be enforced by a supranational agency.
(E) Effective conservation cannot be achieved without eliminating poaching.
Let us try to figure out what the CR looks for!

It says the "problem" is extinction of elephants. So how does it happen?? becox of poaching?? SO how to control that??

Experts says "Put a ban on Ivory trading". This is as simple as imbalance the demand- supply chain. Reduce the demand ,so the supply has to come down!(old economic theory)

COming to the CR, Zimbabwe stand is very much pathetic , becoz they have practiced all the best measures to eliminate poaching and implement good measures to cull elephants that may threaten other animal's existence.

Moreover, Zimbabwe is financially dependent on the trading.

Now implementing the ban will "penalise "zimbabwe becox they have used the best measures for conservation and now they are "Not getting rewarded" by doing Ivory trading.( Its really tough for zimbabwe)

SO ZImbabwe yells to other countries & says "International measures to correct a problem should not adversely affect countries that are not responsible for the problem."

Even at the end of the argument Zimbabwe says problem lies with the conservation programs of other nations. It means that "culling " of elephant herds of other nations are not that perfect/standarised that makes the poachers to kill the "safe" animals for no good reason!!

Definition of Cull (resource Wiki)

Culling is the process of removing animals from a group based on specific criteria. This is done in order to either reinforce certain desirable characteristics or to remove certain undesirable characteristics from the group. For livestock and wildlife, the process of culling usually implies the killing of animals with undesirable characteristics.

Hope I am able to shed some light!!
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:52 pm
thephoenix wrote:
Phenix bhai,

IMO A!!

The question stem asks for "find a option that tries to strengthen Zimbabwe stand against objection to ban"?
OA is A
cud u pls ans my query
Bhai I want a thx...hehehhehe

My count is far less than urs!! hhahhahh!! and harsha & Rockey bhai are so genuine ..they always give me thx,,,where as Fibo/many other known buddies of mine never thank me..sad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bhai, if u want more explanation, i can do that !! read them slowly
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Sat Apr 10, 2010 12:18 am
Moreover, Zimbabwe is financially dependent on the trading.
somwhere i missed this line and now its crystal clear
thanks for your help....
dnt worry about thanks from now on it will keep on inc for a genuine post made by u
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 610
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 12:33 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:2 members

by kstv » Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:00 am
@ gmatmochan

Experts says "Put a ban on Ivory trading". This is as simple as imbalance the demand- supply chain. Reduce the demand ,so the supply has to come down!(old economic theory) Older than Adam Smith !
Ban reduces supply and in most cases lead to pent up demand. Smuggling/Poaching is a direct fallout.


Culling is done to maintain balance of Man - Nature , Carnivore vis a vis prey.
Sometimes elephant herds grow too big leading to forest resource crunch. They stray into human habitat wrecking havoc. Culling the herd and selling the ivory provides much needed conservation money. Banning will dry up the funds for Mugabe.

gmatmochan was astute in identifying this as a Strenghten/weaking CR. Option E will weaken Zimbabwe's case.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Sat Apr 10, 2010 2:53 am
@kstv & @pheonix

Thanks guys!!

I am pinging Deepak dada for some more gyan!!
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1