Hey Guys,

Great explanation from BP here, but due to the ickiness of this question, I wanted to weigh in:

In Scotland, the number of wild salmon have been reduced because of uncontrolled deep-sea and coastal netting, by pollution, and by various other threats to the fish's habitat.

A. number of wild salmon have been reduced because of uncontrolled deep-sea and coastal netting
B. number of wild salmon is reduced because deep-sea and coastal netting is not controlled
C. numbers of wild salmon has been reduced because of uncontrolled deep-sea and coastal netting
D. wild salmon's numbers are reduced by deep-sea and coastal netting that is not controlled
E. wild salmon's numbers have been reduced by uncontrolled deep-sea and coastal netting.

A) As was said, "number" is the subject here. Also, the use of "because" is incorrect. You wouldn't say, "My head was chopped off because of that axe." The deep-sea/coastal netting are the actual TOOL that is doing the reducing, not the REASON the number are being reduced (The reason would be population growth, or an increased demand for salmon). AND, as Bpolley mentioned, it's not parallel with the two "bys" that come later on.

B) The use of the present tense "is" here is strange, because this is an ongoing action, necessitating the present perfect. The use of "because" is slightly better in terms of meaning, but the parallel problem is still there.

C) As was said, "numbers" doesn't match with "has been reduced". The "because" issue is still there.

D) The use of the present tense is still wrong. The modifier "that" is weird here, because it kinda wants to modify both deep-sea and coastal netting, but then the verb should be "are".

E) Yay. I mean, Boo! It's definitely the right answer, but that subject is NASTY. "Wild salmon's numbers" is the worst possible way you could say that (correct would be "The number of wild salmon"). But it's stylistic, not technically grammatical, so we have to pick it. Yuck.

-t