GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 12 Dec 2019, 20:31

### 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

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

# Because of the lucrative but illegal trade in rhinoceros

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 499

### Show Tags

Updated on: 02 Sep 2017, 05:10
10
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

48% (01:55) correct 52% (01:58) wrong based on 450 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Because of the lucrative but illegal trade in rhinoceros horns, a certain rhinoceros species has been hunted nearly to extinction. Therefore an effective way to ensure the survival of that species would be to periodically trim off the horns of all rhinoceroses, thereby eliminating the motivation for poaching.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
(A) Most poachers who are discouraged from hunting rhinoceroses are not likely to hunt other animals for their horns.
(B) At lease some rhinoceroses whose horns are periodically trimmed off will be able to attract mates.
(C) Poachers hunt at lease some immature rhinoceroses whose horns have not yet started to develop.
(D) The demand for rhinoceros horns will remain constant even if the supply decreases after the periodical trimming-off of the rhinoceros horns has begun
(E) Rhinoceroses whose horns have been trimmed off are unable to defend themselves against predators.

Originally posted by prasannar on 22 Apr 2008, 12:08.
Last edited by abhimahna on 02 Sep 2017, 05:10, edited 1 time in total.
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jan 2007
Posts: 339
Location: Earth

### Show Tags

22 Apr 2008, 12:18
B by POE.

Reasoning - if they dont assume B then they might worsen the situation if at all horn are used by rhinos for mating calls....I think this goes into assuming too much which is not mentioned in the passage....but assumption has to be hidden anyway.

But am doubtful.
VP
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 1151

### Show Tags

22 Apr 2008, 17:39
i went for B as well .... survival of species means that reproduction must happen. In order for plan to work, those rhinos have to be able to attract mates.
VP
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1027

### Show Tags

22 Apr 2008, 18:13
prasannar wrote:
Because of the lucrative but illegal trade in rhinoceros horns, a certain rhinoceros species has been hunted nearly to extinction. Therefore an effective way to ensure the survival of that species would be to periodically trim off the horns of all rhinoceroses, thereby eliminating the motivation for poaching.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
(A) Most poachers who are discouraged from hunting rhinoceroses are not likely to hunt other animals for their horns.
(B) At lease some rhinoceroses whose horns are periodically trimmed off will be able to attract mates.
(C) Poachers hunt at lease some immature rhinoceroses whose horns have not yet started to develop.
(D) The demand for rhinoceros horns will remain constant even if the supply decreases after the periodical trimming-off of the rhinoceros horns has begun

(E) Rhinoceroses whose horns have been trimmed off are unable to defend themselves against predators.

B. All of the rest doesn't make much sense. You want an assumption for an argument that if you trim off rhino horns, then the species can survive. B mention that they can attrract mates (and hence reproduce) even if it doesn't have horns.

A, C, D is irrelevant as it doesn't talk about saving the species.
E actually weakens the argument, and not an assumption.
CEO
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2607

### Show Tags

22 Apr 2008, 20:14
B for me. The only way the species will survive after horns cut off is if the new hornless rhinos can find a mate.

prasannar wrote:
Because of the lucrative but illegal trade in rhinoceros horns, a certain rhinoceros species has been hunted nearly to extinction. Therefore an effective way to ensure the survival of that species would be to periodically trim off the horns of all rhinoceroses, thereby eliminating the motivation for poaching.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
(A) Most poachers who are discouraged from hunting rhinoceroses are not likely to hunt other animals for their horns.
(B) At lease some rhinoceroses whose horns are periodically trimmed off will be able to attract mates.
(C) Poachers hunt at lease some immature rhinoceroses whose horns have not yet started to develop.
(D) The demand for rhinoceros horns will remain constant even if the supply decreases after the periodical trimming-off of the rhinoceros horns has begun

(E) Rhinoceroses whose horns have been trimmed off are unable to defend themselves against predators.
Current Student
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 2490
Location: New York City
Schools: Wharton'11 HBS'12

### Show Tags

22 Apr 2008, 20:21
B for me as well..

we have to ensure the survival of the species..and if they dont mate..well too bad then
Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 365

### Show Tags

07 May 2011, 13:32
i think it should be B , but where is the OA ? took 1:30 min
Director
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 819

### Show Tags

07 May 2011, 13:50
Interesting question.

B certainly isn't that straight forward to figure out. The focal point is to prevent extinction.
Thats why B fits the bill.
Manager
Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 152

### Show Tags

07 May 2011, 13:53
B is the answer and you can use the negation technique to figure it out.
Current Student
Status: DONE!
Joined: 05 Sep 2016
Posts: 354

### Show Tags

16 Sep 2016, 09:36
I agree with those above who stated B as the answer

(A) out of the scope
(B) Correct, resolve issue of how trimming horns will ensure rhinos survival as a species
(C) this is support for the opposite argument
(D) suggests that rhinos aren't wanted for just their horns; outside the bounds of the argument presented
Intern
Joined: 21 Jul 2016
Posts: 32
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
WE: Other (Computer Software)

### Show Tags

24 Oct 2016, 07:42
1
A should be the right answer

Conclusion - thereby eliminating the motivation for poaching (or, motivation for poaching "and not rhinoceros poaching

Premise - Because of the lucrative but illegal trade in rhinoceros horns, a certain rhinoceros species has been hunted nearly to extinction. Therefore an effective way to ensure the survival of that species would be to periodically trim off the horns of all rhinoceroses

Author concludes or make a general statement about motivation.

In making the conclusion, author assumes that the hunters motivation won't exist if the horns of rhinos are trimmed.

Lets analyze B now and take it to extremes.

Extreme-1: None of the rhinoceroses whose horns are periodically trimmed off will be able to attract mates. It has no bearing on the conclusion, which is about motivation

Extreme-2: All of the rhinoceroses whose horns are periodically trimmed off will be able to attract mates.. Again,no bearing on the conclusion
Intern
Joined: 03 Nov 2016
Posts: 1

### Show Tags

03 Nov 2016, 07:18
I think it's B. But can anyone help me with the right one
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9874
Location: Pune, India

### Show Tags

05 Nov 2016, 00:03
1
1
prasannar wrote:
Because of the lucrative but illegal trade in rhinoceros horns, a certain rhinoceros species has been hunted nearly to extinction. Therefore an effective way to ensure the survival of that species would be to periodically trim off the horns of all rhinoceroses, thereby eliminating the motivation for poaching.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
(A) Most poachers who are discouraged from hunting rhinoceroses are not likely to hunt other animals for their horns.
(B) At lease some rhinoceroses whose horns are periodically trimmed off will be able to attract mates.
(C) Poachers hunt at lease some immature rhinoceroses whose horns have not yet started to develop.
(D) The demand for rhinoceros horns will remain constant even if the supply decreases after the periodical trimming-off of the rhinoceros horns has begun

(E) Rhinoceroses whose horns have been trimmed off are unable to defend themselves against predators.

Responding to a pm:

Premises:
- Trade in rhinoceros horns is lucrative but illegal
- a certain rhinoceros species has been hunted nearly to extinction.

Conclusion:
Therefore an effective way to ensure the survival of that species would be to periodically trim off the horns of all rhinoceroses, thereby eliminating the motivation for poaching.

The conclusion is that to ensure survival of that species, trim their horns. (So poachers will not poach.) Note that we are targeting survival or the species. What if trimming the horns affects them in another way and endangers the 'survival of the species'? When we conclude that trimming the horns will ensure survival of species, we are assuming that trimming horns doesn't endanger their survival in another way.

(B) At lease some rhinoceroses whose horns are periodically trimmed off will be able to attract mates.
This is correct. We are assuming that the species will survive so trimming horns will not interfere in the mating process.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Intern
Joined: 06 Feb 2016
Posts: 25

### Show Tags

06 Nov 2016, 08:10
Hi All,

If we add another option for e.g. the number of tourist visiting the national park will remain same.
Then which option would be the best. Sorry for asking such question.
Regards
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2849
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

### Show Tags

06 Nov 2016, 12:10
AbhijitGoswami wrote:
Hi All,

If we add another option for e.g. the number of tourist visiting the national park will remain same.
Then which option would be the best. Sorry for asking such question.
Regards

It would mot change the correct option. The option you have mentioned is not related to the argument:
Premise: poaching has brought the species to near extinction.
Conclusion: eliminating motivation for poaching would save the animal from extinction.

Whether there is any change in the number of visitors is irrelevant to the above argument.
Director
Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Posts: 574
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V33
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V38
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)

### Show Tags

05 Apr 2017, 01:23
B- survival is at stake ; trimming helps survival - Assumption to this must help it strengthen the bond -> Even after trimming it is possible for survival. Moreover, other all options are trash.
Manager
Joined: 20 Jan 2016
Posts: 174

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2017, 04:54
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
prasannar wrote:
Because of the lucrative but illegal trade in rhinoceros horns, a certain rhinoceros species has been hunted nearly to extinction. Therefore an effective way to ensure the survival of that species would be to periodically trim off the horns of all rhinoceroses, thereby eliminating the motivation for poaching.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
(A) Most poachers who are discouraged from hunting rhinoceroses are not likely to hunt other animals for their horns.
(B) At lease some rhinoceroses whose horns are periodically trimmed off will be able to attract mates.
(C) Poachers hunt at lease some immature rhinoceroses whose horns have not yet started to develop.
(D) The demand for rhinoceros horns will remain constant even if the supply decreases after the periodical trimming-off of the rhinoceros horns has begun

(E) Rhinoceroses whose horns have been trimmed off are unable to defend themselves against predators.

Responding to a pm:

Premises:
- Trade in rhinoceros horns is lucrative but illegal
- a certain rhinoceros species has been hunted nearly to extinction.

Conclusion:
Therefore an effective way to ensure the survival of that species would be to periodically trim off the horns of all rhinoceroses, thereby eliminating the motivation for poaching.

The conclusion is that to ensure survival of that species, trim their horns. (So poachers will not poach.) Note that we are targeting survival or the species. What if trimming the horns affects them in another way and endangers the 'survival of the species'? When we conclude that trimming the horns will ensure survival of species, we are assuming that trimming horns doesn't endanger their survival in another way.

(B) At lease some rhinoceroses whose horns are periodically trimmed off will be able to attract mates.
This is correct. We are assuming that the species will survive so trimming horns will not interfere in the mating process.

Hi karishma,

Can you explain why E is wrong here?
Board of Directors
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3564

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2017, 05:25
pra1785 wrote:
Hi karishma,

Can you explain why E is wrong here?

Hi pra1785 ,

I am happy to help here

The argument is saying trimming their horns would help us prevent them. How? They will no longer be a source of motivation for hunters. The whole idea lies behind the fact that we need to prevent them from getting extinct.

Goal: Prevent them from getting extinct
Plan: Let's trim their horns to prevent hunting.

Now, I need to show that the plan is a good plan. Or I can say I need to show that hunters will actually not hunt them anymore and thus our purpose will be met.

Assumption: There is no side effect of trimming.

(E) Rhinoceroses whose horns have been trimmed off are unable to defend themselves against predators

It is saying they will not be able to defend themselves against predators. But we are already told that if hunters donot have a source of motivation, they will not hunt the rhinoceroses.

Hence, this point is trying to break the premise. Hence, OUT.

Remember, breaking a premise is NOT allowed on GMAT.

Does that make sense?
_________________
My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place

GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.
New! Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!
Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free
Check our new About Us Page here.
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 7311

### Show Tags

06 Feb 2019, 08:48
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.
Re: Because of the lucrative but illegal trade in rhinoceros   [#permalink] 06 Feb 2019, 08:48
Display posts from previous: Sort by