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

Redeem

Kaplan - rabbits in australia

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 1:05 am
Thanked: 11 times

Kaplan - rabbits in australia

by jube » Thu Jul 15, 2010 7:55 am
Rabbits are not native to Australia, which lacks predators capable of keeping their numbers in check. The rabbit population, left unchecked, expands to such large numbers that it destroys large areas of pastoral land by stripping it of grass. Scientists have recently isolated a virus which has devastated rabbit populations in Central Asia and is harmless to humans. Australian farmers urge scientists to release this virus so that they can reclaim pastoral land currently lost to rabbits.

The farmers who urge the immediate release of the virus assume all of the following EXCEPT

A) the number of natural predators will not significantly increase in Australia in the near future
B) the virus will not be harmful to livestock that graze on the pastoral land
C) the virus will have the same effect on rabbits in Australia as on rabbits in central Asia
D) the release of the virus is the only means of reducing the rabbit population in Australia
E) If the rabbit population fell in Australia, land that had been damaged by rabbits would return to a state useful for farming
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pm
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:1 members

by paes » Thu Jul 15, 2010 8:16 am
IMO D
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:06 am

by mak_mak_mak » Thu Jul 15, 2010 9:54 am
IMO (A)
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
Thanked: 135 times
Followed by:7 members

by selango » Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:02 am
IMO B.
--Anand--
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 11:25 am

by hero » Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:16 am
D. makes sense in my mind, but having a difficult time putting it into words.


edit: seriously considering b now after re-read.

d might be making an assumption of the answer choice ( which is already an assumption ). hmmm....the farmers want the land back for use, but if the livestock get sick as a result there is now another large problem that wasn't considered.

and with answer d, since we have to accept the answer as true, then we now need to believe that the farmers do feel this is the only effective way to reduce the rabbit population, especially since the farmers in question are ONLY the ones pushing for its immediate release ( not all farmers ). something i missed on my first read through.

B looks more attractive after more consideration. interested in other people's opinion.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 186
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 1:05 am
Thanked: 11 times

by jube » Thu Jul 15, 2010 11:53 am
OA is D.

Why is A wrong? For me the fight was b/w A & D and then I went with A because it seemed like D would be an assumption that farmers *would* make. Moreover, even if A is true it won't affect the argument in any way since there are no predators in Australia which will keep the population of rabbits in check... so it's something that farmers will not assume.

The explanation provided for choosing D is: In this case, the farmers don't assume that the virus is the ONLY way to eradicate rabbits; they simply see it as a possibility. I'm not sure what in the passage clues you in to D being just a possibility. Can people who've chosen D talk through their thought process?

Thanks.
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 11:25 am

by hero » Thu Jul 15, 2010 12:13 pm
damn...should have stuck with my first thoughts.

my thinking when choosing D is basically that it is too strong of an assumption to say this virus is the ONLY way to reduce the rabbit population. especially because the premise discusses what happens if left "unchecked".
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pm
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:1 members

by paes » Thu Jul 15, 2010 9:45 pm
jube wrote:OA is D.

Why is A wrong? For me the fight was b/w A & D and then I went with A because it seemed like D would be an assumption that farmers *would* make. Moreover, even if A is true it won't affect the argument in any way since there are no predators in Australia which will keep the population of rabbits in check... so it's something that farmers will not assume.

The explanation provided for choosing D is: In this case, the farmers don't assume that the virus is the ONLY way to eradicate rabbits; they simply see it as a possibility. I'm not sure what in the passage clues you in to D being just a possibility. Can people who've chosen D talk through their thought process?

Thanks.
Note : we have to choose the option which is NOT an assumption.

Now D says that farmers thought that it is the ONLY way.

this statement is not true.
May be farmers think that there are multiple ways to do the work, but they thought that the given method is working fine in Asia, so lets apply the same here.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
Thanked: 135 times
Followed by:7 members

by selango » Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:22 pm
In assumption question,if the answer is negated and if it weaken the argument,then it is correct answer.

Here assumption NOT question.

So negating the answer should not weaken the argument or argument still to be valid.

Negate Option B.

The virus will be harmful to livestock that graze on the pastoral land.

Does this option affect the argument.NO.It strengthen the argument.

Also note that do farmers assume "the virus will not be harmful to livestock" and urge to release the virus?NO

So the correct answer is B
--Anand--
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 am
Thanked: 135 times
Followed by:7 members

by selango » Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:23 pm
paes ..what is OA
--Anand--
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pm
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:1 members

by paes » Thu Jul 15, 2010 10:33 pm
selango wrote:paes ..what is OA
This is not my question,
OA is already written above. It is D.

B is wrong :

negate of B
the virus will be harmful to livestock that graze on the pastoral land --> In this case, obviously the farmers of Australia will not ask for the virus .

Hence B is also an assumption.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 364
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 5:13 am
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:3 members

by FightWithGMAT » Fri Jul 16, 2010 10:11 am
jube wrote:Rabbits are not native to Australia, which lacks predators capable of keeping their numbers in check. The rabbit population, left unchecked, expands to such large numbers that it destroys large areas of pastoral land by stripping it of grass. Scientists have recently isolated a virus which has devastated rabbit populations in Central Asia and is harmless to humans. Australian farmers urge scientists to release this virus so that they can reclaim pastoral land currently lost to rabbits.

The farmers who urge the immediate release of the virus assume all of the following EXCEPT

A) the number of natural predators will not significantly increase in Australia in the near future
B) the virus will not be harmful to livestock that graze on the pastoral land
C) the virus will have the same effect on rabbits in Australia as on rabbits in central Asia
D) the release of the virus is the only means of reducing the rabbit population in Australia
E) If the rabbit population fell in Australia, land that had been damaged by rabbits would return to a state useful for farming
I am sure that B, C and E are the assumptions.
Now b/w A and D......I am not convinced by the OA.

Conclusion says that to claim the land farmers urge to release the virus.
It shows that they assume that they do not have any other alternative.

Additionally, "immediate release" forced me to choose the words near future.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1