Success of Plan: forest often visited

[shailendra.sharma]

In a forest often visited by the residents of a small town bordering it, a plant was discovered that is believed to have been accidentally introduced by colonialists who tried to grow foreign vegetables in the area. The plant carries a potent neurotoxin, and upon digestion is capable of killing small to medium-sized animals. To cease the dwindling population of a small deer species that populates the forest, authorities are planning to erect explanatory signs at all the main entrances to the forest pleading to visitors to uproot and dispose of any such plants if identified.

Which of the following, if true, provides the most solid reason to expect that the authorities' plan will succeed?

A) A glass recycling project that was initiated by the authorities of the town had very successful results primarily because of the enthusiastic cooperation of the townspeople, who were offered small monetary incentives.

B) The elimination of the plants is imperative since the sap carrying the active neurotoxin that can be absorbed by the skin, oozes from picked leaves and results in cardiac symptoms, often fatal to humans.

C) The emblem of the town, a yellow and cobalt blue coat of arms, has in its center a stylized image of the deer species that inhabits the forest, and appears on municipal buildings, statues, and documents.

D) Continuing an age-old tradition started by the founders of the town, many townspeople engage in the breeding of dogs and can often be seen strolling the vicinity with two or three of their prized animals.

E) Mysterious to foreigners, the forest is a territory well-known to the townspeople, who as youths often wander through it, becoming familiar with the countless hidden paths leading into it.

OA - D

Why OA shall be D - It talks about dogs and not small deers.

In my opinion answer shall be E -- as it increases the probability of erecting those plants from hidden paths of the forest.

[[email protected]]

Hi shailendra.sharma,

This CR question is built around a PLAN. According to the prompt, the plan will work if:

1) Authorities place signs explaining what to do with these plants.
2) People read the signs and enter the forest.
3) People uproot the plants

So, you need an answer that supports the steps in this plan. Since the essential part has to do with people interacting with the plants IN THE FOREST, the most straight-forward way to strengthen this plan is to say that YES, people enter the forest.

Answer D provides that info. Answer E might be tempting, but it talks about the townspeople as youths. What the townspeople did when they were younger isn't relevant, since the signs didn't exist back then.

GMAT assassins aren't born, they're made,
Rich

[[email protected]]

Shailendra,

If u read the stem carefully, it states that the neurotoxin kills small to medium sized animals.

If you read D it says that "Continuing an age-old tradition started by the founders of the town, many townspeople engage in the breeding of dogs and can often be seen strolling the vicinity with two or three of their prized animals".

So, it is safe to assume that these neurotoxins upon digestion by the pet dogs can kill them. And these dogs are prized possession of their owners, who when coming across these dangerous plants would try to uproot them to save their animals.

[David@VeritasPrep]

nishatfarhat87@gmail has the logic that the test makers have used.

By the way the source for this one is listed (On GMAT Club) as being GMAT.Babson.Edu I am not sure if this is the source.

I was curious about this question so I looked for other references. I found this one and have copied part of it below. I would tend to agree that this one does not have a correct answer. (when the post mentions "blueseas" that person gave a similar reason to the one from nishatfarhat87@gmail

In my opinion, I don't see any of these choices as the correct option, per GMAT standards.

Even though blueseas has very aptly listed out the reason in favor of Option D, a reason which I believe must be shared by the question makers too, in my opinion, option D misses the essence of the plan.

The plan nowhere lists that people would be made aware that such plants cause deaths of small to mid-size animals. The plan is to plead them to uproot those plants. Now, there are two situations possible:

1. People already know that these plants are poisonous for their dogs - In this case, they don't need any pleading. They'll do it anyway. So, the plan is not going to have any impact.
2. People don't know about it - In this case, there is no difference between dog-owners and others. So, given option would not strengthen the belief in the success of the plan.

So, in both case, option D is not going to help.

Now, there is only one face saver for the question makers - they have used word "explanatory signs" - this can be used by them to say that they meant telling that plants are harmful for small and mid sized animals. But I don't buy this logic. If the intention is to explain, then it should be "explain the visitors", rather than "plead to visitors".

All in all, option D is not a strengthener, per GMAT standards.

Thanks,
Chiranjeev

What do you guys think? Will D be the correct answer with a little editing?