Funding opponent: Some people favor city funding for the spaying and neutering of pets at the owners request. They claims that the decrease in the number of stray animals to contend with will offset the costs of the funding. These people fail to realize that over 80 percent of pet owners already pay to spay or neuter their animals, so there will not be a significant decrease in the number of stray animals in the city if funding is provided.

Each of the following, if true, strengthens the argument of the funding opponent EXCEPT:

(A) Very few of the stray animals in the city are offspring of pets.

(B) Many pet owners would have their animals spayed or neutered sooner if funding were provided by the city

(C) The only way the number of tray animals can decrease is if existing strays are spayed or neutered.

(D) Most people owners who do not have their pets spayed or neutered believed that spaying and neutering are morally wrong.

(E) The majority of pets that are not spayed or neutered are used for breeding purposes, and are not likely to produce stray animals.

I would say B as well.

where did you get this question? doesn't seem very structured?

B.

This question is full of double negatives that you must cut out. The question is asking to weaken the statement "the payment will decrease the # of stray animals."

Funding opponent: Some people favor city funding for the spaying and neutering of pets at the owners request. They claims that the decrease in the number of stray animals to contend with will offset the costs of the funding. These people fail to realize that over 80 percent of pet owners already pay to spay or neuter their animals, so there will not be a significant decrease in the number of stray animals in the city if funding is provided.

Each of the following, if true, strengthens the argument of the funding opponent EXCEPT:

(A) Very few of the stray animals in the city are offspring of pets.
This strengthens the argument.

(C) The only way the number of stray animals can decrease is if existing strays are spayed or neutered.
This strengthens the argument.

(D) Most people owners who do not have their pets spayed or neutered believed that spaying and neutering are morally wrong.
This strengthens the argument as even if funding is provided some people will not be getting their pets neutered.

(E) The majority of pets that are not spayed or neutered are used for breeding purposes, and are not likely to produce stray animals.
This strengthens the argument as even if funding is provided some people will not be getting their pets neutered.

(B) Many pet owners would have their animals spayed or neutered sooner if funding were provided by the city
This is the only option in favor of city funding for neutering of pets.

So i go with option B.
_________________

Give [highlight]KUDOS [/highlight] if you like my post.

Always do things which make you feel ALIVE!!!