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

Redeem
TTP OnDemand GMAT Video Course
Featured Course

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.

  • 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
  • 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
  • 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
  • 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
  • 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
  • TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
  • 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
  • OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
  • Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
  • MBA Admissions Consulting now available
  • 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
  • 200,000+ students served
  • 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★ 5.0 (559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start then $127/mo
Start Free 5-Day Trial Read 559 Reviews →

Yucaipa tree population

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 447
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:08 pm
Location: Kolkata,India
Thanked: 7 times
GMAT Score:670
by uptowngirl92 » Thu Aug 13, 2009 7:13 pm
No nation in the world has experienced as significant a decline in its Yucaipa tree population as our nation. Yet only our nation imposes a law prohibiting the use of Yucaipa tree-bark oil in cosmetics. The purpose of this law in the first place was to help maintain the Yucaipa tree population, at least in this nation. But the law is clearly unnecessary and therefore should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn in the passage?

a. This nation contains more Yucaipa trees than any other nation.
b. Yucaipa tree-bark oil is not used for any consumer goods other than cosmetics.
c. The demand for cosmetics containing Yucaipa tree-bark oil is expected to decline in the future in other nations while continuing unabated in this nation.
d. In other countries, labor used to harvest Yucaipa trees for cosmetics is less expensive than comparable labor in this nation.
e. In this nation, some wild animals eat Yucaipa tree bark, thereby contributing to their destruction.

So we have to find the answer that say the law is "necessary"
c. The demand for cosmetics containing Yucaipa tree-bark oil is expected to decline in the future in other nations while continuing unabated in this nation.>>>Demand is continuing steady >>> Weaken
Right?
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 727
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 9:32 pmFollowed by: 1 member
Thanked: 8 times

Re: Yucaipa tree population

by umaa » Thu Aug 13, 2009 7:28 pm
uptowngirl92 wrote:No nation in the world has experienced as significant a decline in its Yucaipa tree population as our nation. Yet only our nation imposes a law prohibiting the use of Yucaipa tree-bark oil in cosmetics. The purpose of this law in the first place was to help maintain the Yucaipa tree population, at least in this nation. But the law is clearly unnecessary and therefore should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn in the passage?

a. This nation contains more Yucaipa trees than any other nation.
b. Yucaipa tree-bark oil is not used for any consumer goods other than cosmetics.
c. The demand for cosmetics containing Yucaipa tree-bark oil is expected to decline in the future in other nations while continuing unabated in this nation.
d. In other countries, labor used to harvest Yucaipa trees for cosmetics is less expensive than comparable labor in this nation.
e. In this nation, some wild animals eat Yucaipa tree bark, thereby contributing to their destruction.

So we have to find the answer that say the law is "necessary"
c. The demand for cosmetics containing Yucaipa tree-bark oil is expected to decline in the future in other nations while continuing unabated in this nation.>>>Demand is continuing steady >>> Weaken
Right?
IMO B.

As you already know, A, D and E are wrong.

C is wrong because, Country X is trying to maintain Yucaipa tree population in it. It doesn't need to worry about other countries and the effect.

B is correct because, if Yucaipa tree oil is not used in any other consumer good other than cosmetics, then if X bans using Yucaipa tree oil for cosmetics, then it can maintain Yucaipa tree population.
What we think, we become
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 4:04 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 4 times
GMAT Score:680

by sbasha » Thu Aug 13, 2009 7:29 pm
C top my list.

Unabated is what demand is increasing/existing/ etc..... so its C
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 177
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:06 amFollowed by: 1 member
Thanked: 2 times

Re: Yucaipa tree population

by perfectstranger » Sun Aug 16, 2009 10:09 am
uptowngirl92 wrote:No nation in the world has experienced as significant a decline in its Yucaipa tree population as our nation. Yet only our nation imposes a law prohibiting the use of Yucaipa tree-bark oil in cosmetics. The purpose of this law in the first place was to help maintain the Yucaipa tree population, at least in this nation. But the law is clearly unnecessary and therefore should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn in the passage?


b. Yucaipa tree-bark oil is not used for any consumer goods other than cosmetics.-- THIS STRENGTHEN THE ARGUMENT SINCE THE ASSUMPTION UNDERLYING IS Yucaipa tree-bark oil is not used for any consumer goods other than cosmetics---

c. The demand for cosmetics containing Yucaipa tree-bark oil is expected to decline in the future in other nations while continuing unabated in this nation. --- WRONG SINCE THE STEM USED PRESENT PERFECT HOWEVER THE CHOICE USES FUTURE TENSE SO IT IS OUT OF SCOPE--

e. In this nation, some wild animals eat Yucaipa tree bark, thereby contributing to their destruction.--IF THERE ARE OTHER FACTORS THAN PROHIBITING YUCAIPA TREE BECOME EXTINCT AS THIS FACTOR--

So we have to find the answer that say the law is "necessary"
c. The demand for cosmetics containing Yucaipa tree-bark oil is expected to decline in the future in other nations while continuing unabated in this nation.>>>Demand is continuing steady >>> Weaken
Right?
Please do not post answers visibly . Please hide them or post them later after the discussion.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 79
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:02 am
Thanked: 1 times

Re: Yucaipa tree population

by bignasty666 » Sun Aug 16, 2009 10:43 am
uptowngirl92 wrote:No nation in the world has experienced as significant a decline in its Yucaipa tree population as our nation. Yet only our nation imposes a law prohibiting the use of Yucaipa tree-bark oil in cosmetics. The purpose of this law in the first place was to help maintain the Yucaipa tree population, at least in this nation. But the law is clearly unnecessary and therefore should be repealed.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the conclusion drawn in the passage?

a. This nation contains more Yucaipa trees than any other nation.
b. Yucaipa tree-bark oil is not used for any consumer goods other than cosmetics.
c. The demand for cosmetics containing Yucaipa tree-bark oil is expected to decline in the future in other nations while continuing unabated in this nation.
d. In other countries, labor used to harvest Yucaipa trees for cosmetics is less expensive than comparable labor in this nation.
e. In this nation, some wild animals eat Yucaipa tree bark, thereby contributing to their destruction.

So we have to find the answer that say the law is "necessary"
c. The demand for cosmetics containing Yucaipa tree-bark oil is expected to decline in the future in other nations while continuing unabated in this nation.>>>Demand is continuing steady >>> Weaken
Right?
THINK THE ANSWER SHOULD BE E...BEST OF WORST CHOICES.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 101
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:14 am
Thanked: 2 times

by Spring2009 » Sun Aug 16, 2009 11:39 am
Should be C.
If the demand for the oil is high, the law is still necessary.
If the law is repealed, the tree population even decrease more.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 1161
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 amFollowed by: 1 member
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 23 times

by mehravikas » Sun Aug 16, 2009 1:11 pm
IMO - C
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Legendary Member
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:14 am
Location: Atlanta
Thanked: 17 times

by pandeyvineet24 » Sun Aug 16, 2009 8:01 pm
C in my opinion.

The bold portion supports that necessity of the law.

The demand for cosmetics containing Yucaipa tree-bark oil is expected to decline in the future in other nations while continuing unabated in this nation.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 1048
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:26 amFollowed by: 27 members
Location: India
Thanked: 51 times
GMAT Score:670

by arora007 » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:51 am
This is a question which appeared in the "Peterson master GMAT test 2"

the orignal answer is D but i feel it should have been C.
Guys can anybody expalain if OA could be correct??
https://www.skiponemeal.org/
https://twitter.com/skiponemeal
Few things are impossible to diligence & skill.Great works are performed not by strength,but by perseverance

pm me if you find junk/spam/abusive language, Lets keep our community clean!!
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 226
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 1:46 am
Thanked: 2 times

by martin.jonson007 » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:19 am
This ques seems to be wrongly copied at first place...


It is so strange that argument says But the law is clearly unnecessary and therefore should be repealed. WITHOUT GIVING A SINGLE REASON ....! HOW IT CAN USE WORD CLEARLY , WHEN NOT AN IOTA IS GIVEN TO JUSTIFY THAT...
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 535
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:12 amFollowed by: 5 members
Thanked: 87 times
GMAT Score:730

by hardik.jadeja » Sat Jun 19, 2010 4:41 am
uptowngirl92 wrote: So we have to find the answer that say the law is "necessary"
c. The demand for cosmetics containing Yucaipa tree-bark oil is expected to decline in the future in other nations while continuing unabated in this nation.>>>Demand is continuing steady >>> Weaken
Right?
Yes, your reasoning is correct. The answer must be C.
arora007 wrote: This is a question which appeared in the "Peterson master GMAT test 2"

the orignal answer is D but i feel it should have been C.
Guys can anybody expalain if OA could be correct??
Are you sure OA is D? Even MGMAT experts, including Ron, feel that the answer has to be C. Refer this thread: https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/gma ... t4404.html
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1