Harbor Seals- weaken

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 431
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 9:32 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:1 members

Harbor Seals- weaken

by kanha81 » Tue May 19, 2009 7:45 pm
A 20 percent decline in lobster catches in Maine waters since 1980 can be justifiably blamed on legislation passed in 1972 to protect harbor seals. Maine’s population of harbor seals is now double the level existing before production was initiated, and these seals are known to eat both fish and lobsters.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?

(A) Harbor seals usually eat more fish than lobsters, but the seals are natural predators of both

(B) Although harbor seals are skillful predators of lobsters, they rarely finish eating their catch.

(C) Harbor seals attract tourists to Maine’s coastal areas, thus revitalizing the local economy.

(D) Authors of the 1972 legislation protecting harbor seals were convinced that an increase in that animal’s numbers would not have a measurably negative impact on the lobster catch.

(E) The record lobster harvests of the late 1970’s removed large numbers of mature lobsters from the reproductive stock

Explain your answers.
Want to Beat GMAT.
Always do what you're afraid to do. Whoooop GMAT
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 12:55 pm
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:1 members

Re: Harbor Seals- weaken

by vinaynp » Tue May 19, 2009 8:12 pm
kanha81 wrote:A 20 percent decline in lobster catches in Maine waters since 1980 can be justifiably blamed on legislation passed in 1972 to protect harbor seals. Maine’s population of harbor seals is now double the level existing before production was initiated, and these seals are known to eat both fish and lobsters.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?

(A) Harbor seals usually eat more fish than lobsters, but the seals are natural predators of both

(B) Although harbor seals are skillful predators of lobsters, they rarely finish eating their catch.

(C) Harbor seals attract tourists to Maine’s coastal areas, thus revitalizing the local economy.

(D) Authors of the 1972 legislation protecting harbor seals were convinced that an increase in that animal’s numbers would not have a measurably negative impact on the lobster catch.

(E) The record lobster harvests of the late 1970’s removed large numbers of mature lobsters from the reproductive stock

Explain your answers.
We would like to establish that lobsters decline is not related to increase in harbor seals population. This would undermine the argument.

A) Supporting information. It does not weaken.
B) Out of scope.
C) Out of scope.
D) Underestimation by legislators doesn't apply here.

E) The lobsters decline is related to record lobster harvests.

IMO E OA please.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 109
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 8:22 pm
Location: Indy
Thanked: 3 times

Re: Harbor Seals- weaken

by amazonviper » Wed May 20, 2009 6:51 pm
kanha81 wrote:A 20 percent decline in lobster catches in Maine waters since 1980 can be justifiably blamed on legislation passed in 1972 to protect harbor seals. Maine’s population of harbor seals is now double the level existing before production was initiated, and these seals are known to eat both fish and lobsters.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the argument above?

(A) Harbor seals usually eat more fish than lobsters, but the seals are natural predators of both

(B) Although harbor seals are skillful predators of lobsters, they rarely finish eating their catch.

(C) Harbor seals attract tourists to Maine’s coastal areas, thus revitalizing the local economy.

(D) Authors of the 1972 legislation protecting harbor seals were convinced that an increase in that animal’s numbers would not have a measurably negative impact on the lobster catch.

(E) The record lobster harvests of the late 1970’s removed large numbers of mature lobsters from the reproductive stock

Explain your answers.

(A) Harbor seals usually eat more fish than lobsters, but the seals are natural predators of both-> "usually" is word to watch out for. Hence the Seals "can" eat more lobsters then fish on several occasions too.Does not weaken the argument.

(B) Although harbor seals are skillful predators of lobsters, they rarely finish eating their catch.--> Out of relevance. We are not concerned about whether the seals finish the meal or not . Does not weaken or strengthen.

(C) Harbor seals attract tourists to Maine’s coastal areas, thus revitalizing the local economy.-> Out of relevance. Does not weaken or strengthen.


(D) Authors of the 1972 legislation protecting harbor seals were convinced that an increase in that animal’s numbers would not have a measurably negative impact on the lobster catch.-->We are not concerned about what the legislature "felt".

(E) The record lobster harvests of the late 1970’s removed large numbers of mature lobsters from the reproductive stock.->If this were turbo then we have not Mature lobsters to reproduce and hence they will not increase in number. This explains the decrease in the quantity of catch. Take in to account the years in the passage. The record catches was in the late 70's and the 20% reduction is in the 1980. It makes sense.If this were true then the legislation had nothing to do with the decrease in catch.
So, My choice would be "E". Please let me know the OA.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 575
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:58 am
Location: India
Thanked: 18 times
Followed by:4 members
GMAT Score:710

by rahulg83 » Wed May 20, 2009 7:11 pm
Oa is E

User avatar
MBA Student
Posts: 1194
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 9:42 pm
Location: Paris, France
Thanked: 71 times
Followed by:17 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmat740 » Wed May 20, 2009 7:12 pm
E provides an alternate option for the reason why Lobster population decline,so E is the correct answer.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:28 am

by mason77 » Sun May 15, 2016 2:10 pm
C seems to be the best choice