Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 26 Aug 2016, 00:30
GMAT Club Tests

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 23 Jul 2009
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [1] , given: 0

In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Aug 2009, 17:50
1
This post received
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

83% (02:16) correct 17% (01:34) wrong based on 707 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 22
Page: 123
Difficulty:


In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the river's water is strictly controlled: farms along the river each have a limited allocation that they are allowed to use for irrigation. But the trees that grow in narrow strips along the river’s banks also use its water. Clearly, therefore, if farmers were to remove those trees, more water would be available for crop irrigation

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?


a. The trees along the river’s banks shelter it from the sun and wind, thereby greatly reducing the amount of water lost through evaporation
b. Owners of farms along the river will probably not undertake the expense of cutting down trees along the banks unless they are granted a greater allocation of water in return
c. Many of the tree species currently found along the river’s banks are specifically adapted to growing in places where tree roots remain constantly wet.
d. The strip of land where trees grow along the river’s banks would not be suitable for growing crops if the trees were removed.
e. The distribution of water allocations for irrigation is intended to prevent farms father upstream from using water needed by farms father downstream
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by Narenn on 16 Oct 2013, 07:19, edited 1 time in total.
Necessary Corrections for Official Guide Verbal Review 2nd Edition Project
1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 339
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 114 [1] , given: 14

Re: water allocation [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Aug 2009, 18:06
1
This post received
KUDOS
Answer is A

Conclusion :Clearly, therefore, if farmers were to remove those trees, more water would be available for crop irrigation

So, answer should be the one where emphasis is on water saving

a. The trees along the river’s banks shelter it from the sun and wind, thereby greatly reducing the amount of water lost through evaporation
A fits nicely

Why D is not the answer:-
It talks about more area for crop and not about water and does not weaken the conclusion
_________________

Always tag your question

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 898
Name: Ronak Amin
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Followers: 26

Kudos [?]: 557 [0], given: 18

Re: water allocation [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Aug 2009, 23:30
Dear yyc881123, would appreciate if you post the OA after people post their explanations so that everyone can benefit.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Posts: 206
GMAT 1: Q V
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 5

Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2012, 19:56
I have chosen A for this question:

The conclusion is: [highlight]If farmers were to remove the trees, more water would be available for crop irrigation.[/highlight]

When I first read the passage, I knew that the question would ask for an answer choice to weaken the argument. If you look at the argument, the reasoning is clearly flawed - just by removing the trees, the author is assuming that the total amount of water available would suddenly increase. There are other factors that the author has not considered - this leads me to my prephrases:

1. The water could migrate elsewhere. For example, maybe the water would move into the voids that the trees have left, or maybe the water would move into other porous spaces.
2. The water may evaporate quicker without the shade of the trees.

Now look at each answer choice:

A. This answer choice looks like one of my prephrases. After careful review of the other choices, this is the answer I chose.

B. The argument has already stated "if farmers were to remove the trees...", so this answer choice already does not make sense because it is assumed in the passage. Also, this answer choice doesn't talk about an increase in the total amount of water, instead it talks about whether the farmers will cut down the trees.

C. This actually supports the argument because it states that these trees constantly have wet roots, so these trees probably consume more water than normal. Therefore, this answer choice is incorrect.

D. We are not concerned about whether the land is prime for farming or not - this answer choice is irrelevant.

E. This answer choice talks about the distribution of the total water, and not about whether the total water will increase or decrease once the trees are removed. Therefore, this answer cannot be correct.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 369
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 151 [0], given: 31

Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2012, 23:08
A goes the best among others
_________________

Practice Practice and practice...!!

If my reply /analysis is helpful-->please press KUDOS
If there's a loophole in my analysis--> suggest measures to make it airtight.

Current Student
avatar
Joined: 28 Apr 2011
Posts: 195
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 6

Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Mar 2012, 04:00
IMO A......... Very nice though
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: May The Force Be With Me (D-DAY 15 May 2012)
Joined: 06 Jan 2012
Posts: 289
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 214 [0], given: 16

Reviews Badge
Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Mar 2012, 04:18
Hi,

Even i fell for D. Its a very good example of the "EGG SHELL GAME" the GMAT loves to play.

The trick is to identify that D - "The strip of land where trees grow along the river’s banks would not be suitable for growing crops if the trees were removed. " limits the argument to only the strip of land near the river

The argument can be weakened to a greater extent if the benefit of having the trees along the river bank could be felt over a larger area. This is clearly seen in A

Hence A is correct
_________________

Giving +1 kudos is a better way of saying 'Thank You'.

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Posts: 239
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 16

Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Mar 2012, 11:13
A clearly weaken the conclusion "if farmers were to remove those trees, more water would be available for crop irrigation
"
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 123
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 269

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Mar 2014, 17:17
yyc881123 wrote:
Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 22
Page: 123
Difficulty:


In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the river's water is strictly controlled: farms along the river each have a limited allocation that they are allowed to use for irrigation. But the trees that grow in narrow strips along the river’s banks also use its water. Clearly, therefore, if farmers were to remove those trees, more water would be available for crop irrigation

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?


a. The trees along the river’s banks shelter it from the sun and wind, thereby greatly reducing the amount of water lost through evaporation
b. Owners of farms along the river will probably not undertake the expense of cutting down trees along the banks unless they are granted a greater allocation of water in return
c. Many of the tree species currently found along the river’s banks are specifically adapted to growing in places where tree roots remain constantly wet.
d. The strip of land where trees grow along the river’s banks would not be suitable for growing crops if the trees were removed.
e. The distribution of water allocations for irrigation is intended to prevent farms father upstream from using water needed by farms father downstream

Please clear my doubt : The trees along the river’s banks shelter it from the sun and wind, thereby greatly reducing the amount of water lost through evaporation : So I concluded from this sentence that if we remove the trees then a great amount of water would be lost through evaporation but in the same case we would have more water for crop irrigation.So let's suppose we have 100 ml of more water available for irrigation and 99 ml is evaporated then also we will have extra 1 ml for growing crops and this 1 ml will be enough to get to our conclusion.I know this is a far fetched conclusion but I want to clear my thought process on this.
MBA Blogger
User avatar
Joined: 19 Apr 2014
Posts: 100
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 52

Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Sep 2014, 23:01
What if complete 100ml of water is evaporated then our conclusion is not met!!
If the back end supply of water goes lower, then no more water will be available than what is available today.
This will result in less irrigation and will directly effect farms and crops.

I hope its clear!

282552 wrote:
yyc881123 wrote:
Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 22
Page: 123
Difficulty:


In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the river's water is strictly controlled: farms along the river each have a limited allocation that they are allowed to use for irrigation. But the trees that grow in narrow strips along the river’s banks also use its water. Clearly, therefore, if farmers were to remove those trees, more water would be available for crop irrigation

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?


a. The trees along the river’s banks shelter it from the sun and wind, thereby greatly reducing the amount of water lost through evaporation
b. Owners of farms along the river will probably not undertake the expense of cutting down trees along the banks unless they are granted a greater allocation of water in return
c. Many of the tree species currently found along the river’s banks are specifically adapted to growing in places where tree roots remain constantly wet.
d. The strip of land where trees grow along the river’s banks would not be suitable for growing crops if the trees were removed.
e. The distribution of water allocations for irrigation is intended to prevent farms father upstream from using water needed by farms father downstream

Please clear my doubt : The trees along the river’s banks shelter it from the sun and wind, thereby greatly reducing the amount of water lost through evaporation : So I concluded from this sentence that if we remove the trees then a great amount of water would be lost through evaporation but in the same case we would have more water for crop irrigation.So let's suppose we have 100 ml of more water available for irrigation and 99 ml is evaporated then also we will have extra 1 ml for growing crops and this 1 ml will be enough to get to our conclusion.I know this is a far fetched conclusion but I want to clear my thought process on this.

_________________

KUDOS please!! If it helped. :)
Warm Regards.
Visit My Blog

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 605
Location: Germany
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 580 Q46 V24
GPA: 3.88
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 182 [0], given: 200

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Feb 2015, 13:43
narrowed to A and B and picked B (.

I don't get why A is right.. just assumed another scenario and B suited it better. The ARgument says that the farmers have a limited portion of water - let's say 500 Liter per day, if there is more or less water that share would not change; A doesn't say the when we cut all the trees there is almost no water to serve farmers, it just says there is less water.

What's wrong with B - does it strengthen the argument ?
_________________

When you’re up, your friends know who you are. When you’re down, you know who your friends are.

Share some Kudos, if my posts help you. Thank you !

800Score ONLY QUANT CAT1 51, CAT2 50, CAT3 50
GMAT PREP 670
MGMAT CAT 630
KAPLAN CAT 660

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 20 Apr 2013
Posts: 144
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 17

In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Mar 2015, 10:38
ichha148 wrote:
Why D is not the answer:-
It talks about more area for crop and not about water and does not weaken the conclusion

Notice that the "strip of land" talked about in D is just limited to the strip of land along the river's banks where trees grow. This should not be confused with "arid land along the Colorado River", which is really the focus of this question.

So, if D had said "The ARID land where trees grow along the river’s banks would not be suitable for growing crops if the trees were removed", then I believe D definitely would have been the correct answer.

Wow! So easy to get confused on this, during the exam!
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 9207
Followers: 802

Kudos [?]: 165 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Apr 2016, 00:17
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Expert Post
Optimus Prep Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 06 Nov 2014
Posts: 1653
Followers: 43

Kudos [?]: 339 [0], given: 21

Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Apr 2016, 00:46
yyc881123 wrote:
[textarea]Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the river's water is strictly controlled: farms along the river each have a limited allocation that they are allowed to use for irrigation. But the trees that grow in narrow strips along the river’s banks also use its water. Clearly, therefore, if farmers were to remove those trees, more water would be available for crop irrigation

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?


a. The trees along the river’s banks shelter it from the sun and wind, thereby greatly reducing the amount of water lost through evaporation
b. Owners of farms along the river will probably not undertake the expense of cutting down trees along the banks unless they are granted a greater allocation of water in return
c. Many of the tree species currently found along the river’s banks are specifically adapted to growing in places where tree roots remain constantly wet.
d. The strip of land where trees grow along the river’s banks would not be suitable for growing crops if the trees were removed.
e. The distribution of water allocations for irrigation is intended to prevent farms father upstream from using water needed by farms father downstream


Premise: Use of river water is strictly controlled, but there are some trees that use the river's water.
Conclusion: If the trees are removed, more water will be available for irrigation.

We need to weaken this conclusion.
The conclusion can be weakened if we can prove that the trees are not just water suckers, they are actually doing a good job standing there.
Of the given options, option A talks on the same lines by saying that the trees reduce the amount of water that is lost because of evaporation.

Correct Option: A
_________________

Janielle Williams

Customer Support

Special Offer: $80-100/hr. Online Private Tutoring
GMAT On Demand Course $299
Free Online Trial Hour

Math Forum Moderator
User avatar
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 722
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 26

Kudos [?]: 232 [0], given: 56

GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 May 2016, 20:54
In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the river's water is strictly controlled: farms along the river each have a limited allocation that they are allowed to use for irrigation. But the trees that grow in narrow strips along the river’s banks also use its water. Clearly, therefore, if farmers were to remove those trees, more water would be available for crop irrigation

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

Conclusion - Remove trees -> more water would be available for crop irrigation
To weaken the conclusion , the correct answer will show that there is a problem with the proposed plan .

a. The trees along the river’s banks shelter it from the sun and wind, thereby greatly reducing the amount of water lost through evaporation.
Correct Answer . If the trees greatly reduce the amount of water lost through evaporation , then removing the trees is likely to make LESS water available for crop irrigation . Thus , it will weaken the argument
b. Owners of farms along the river will probably not undertake the expense of cutting down trees along the banks unless they are granted a greater allocation of water in return . Irrelevant .
One should be skeptical of choices that question the difficulty of implementation of the plan .

c. Many of the tree species currently found along the river’s banks are specifically adapted to growing in places where tree roots remain constantly wet.
Incorrect
d. The strip of land where trees grow along the river’s banks would not be suitable for growing crops if the trees were removed.
iSWAT - This option focuses on the strip of land where trees grow along the river bank's .
Also the conclusion focus directly on availability of water .
e. The distribution of water allocations for irrigation is intended to prevent farms father upstream from using water needed by farms father downstream.
Incorrect - Irrelevant
_________________

When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
+1 Kudos if you find this post helpful

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 09 Mar 2014
Posts: 7
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 72

In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Jun 2016, 04:38
BrainLab wrote:
narrowed to A and B and picked B (.

I don't get why A is right.. just assumed another scenario and B suited it better. The ARgument says that the farmers have a limited portion of water - let's say 500 Liter per day, if there is more or less water that share would not change; A doesn't say the when we cut all the trees there is almost no water to serve farmers, it just says there is less water.

What's wrong with B - does it strengthen the argument ?


I thought so too, since it says in the premise that farmers have a certain allocation. I thought the allocation would stay the same even if the trees are removed. What is the use of removing the trees if they still don't get any increase in their allocation?
In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the   [#permalink] 12 Jun 2016, 04:38
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
4 Experts publish their posts in the topic PhishCo runs a number of farms in the arid madhavsrinivas 3 21 Jun 2016, 18:15
21 Experts publish their posts in the topic In Colorado subalpine meadows, amatya 28 10 Sep 2015, 06:39
3 The construction of Glenn Canyon Dam on the Colorado river bschool83 16 14 Jul 2011, 21:12
Building the Glenn Canyon dam on the Colorado river caused x97agarwal 9 02 Aug 2008, 11:03
Whales originated in the freshwater lakes and rivers of ajisha 5 09 Aug 2007, 10:11
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In the arid land along the Colorado River, use of the

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.