Bottom trawling is a type of deep-sea fishing that involves dragging a

Question

Bottom trawling is a type of deep-sea fishing that involves dragging a large net along the bottom of the ocean, and it results in catching and killing many unintended species, some of which are endangered. Environmental advocates, concerned for these endangered marine species, have recommended that commercial fishers use a new set of nets, each designed specifically for the size and shape and pheromones (chemical attractors) of an individual marine species targeted by the commercial fishers. Environmentalists hope use of these new nets will protect the endangered marine species without interrupting commercial deep-sea fishing.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that use of the new nets will have the intended effects?

(A) The pheromones that would most attract the food species sought by commercial fishers indicate the presence of a dangerous threat to most of the endangered marine species.

(B) Some endangered marine species are particularly large, as large any species targeted by commercial deep-sea fishing.

(C) Most of the newly design nets are not significantly more expensive than a typical bottom trawling system.

(D) Catching unintended, endangered species adds nothing to the profits of a commercial deep-sea fishing company.

(E) Freshwater fishers often increase the odds of catching a desired fish, and avoid catching unintended species, by the specific design of the fishing hook.

akhil911 · Accepted Answer

The conclusion here states that the new nets would help protect endangered species.
Now what could help strengthen this argument.

Prethink - Some evidence which shows that the new nets have been successful in this in other areas.

Option A is right on dot because according to this if the pheromones released by the new nets give a signal to the endangered species of an imminent threat then they will not come near the net and hence will be saved.

All other options are not relevant to the argument.

Kudos me if you like the post !!!

KyleWiddison · Answer

I can see the confusion here. The argument is poorly written because it does not make clear how the pheromones function in the net. The argument states that fisherman should use "a new set of nets, each designed specifically for the size and shape and pheromones (chemical attractors) of an individual marine species targeted by the commercial fishers." This wording suggests that the nets are "designed for" pheromones, not that they are designed "to release" pheromones. The argument should be re-written to establish clearly that the net contains/releases the pheromones, then the information in answer choice A would strengthen the argument because the released pheromones would attract desired fish and repel endangered species.

KW

tuanquang269 · Answer

Premise 1:  Bottom trawling is a type of deep-sea fishing that involves dragging a large net along the bottom of the ocean, and it results in catching and killing many unintended species, some of which are endangered.

Premise 2: New set of nets, each designed specifically for the size and shape and pheromones (chemical attractors) of an individual marine species targeted by the commercial fishers.

Conclusion:  New nets will protect the endangered marine species without interrupting commercial deep-sea fishing
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that use of the new nets will have the intended effects?

A.) The pheromones that would most attract the food species sought by commercial fishers indicate the presence of a dangerous threat to most of the endangered marine species.
 => This choice indicates that the old pheromone is the threat to endangered species => So, should change the new type pheromones and the new net to avoid harming the endangered species.  
B.) Some endangered marine species are particularly large, as large any species targeted by commercial deep-sea fishing. 
 => Irrelevant 
C.)Most of the newly design nets are not significantly more expensive than a typical bottom trawling system. 
 => Cost of the new net is irrelevant to the conclusion which stated the benefits 
D.)Catching unintended, endangered species adds nothing to the profits of a commercial deep-sea fishing company.
 => Profit is also irrelevant 
E.)Freshwater fishers often increase the odds of catching a desired fish, and avoid catching unintended species, by the specific design of the fishing hook.
 => Freshwater fishers are also irrelevant here

janxavier · Answer

From the passage it is evident that the pheromones are part of the organism. How can we say that only one type of pheromones would be released?

i do not get A. Are we to assume that the new net releases pheromones?

vards · Answer

Hii friend

Option A is highly prephrased in such a way that it takes time to understand its intended meaning(happened with me) It basically states that these pheromones of new net attract the sea food and make the endangered species,who are near the net, feel the presence of something dangerous to their lives that makes them stay away from the net..therefore only the required sea food will be captured by the net and intended effect will take place.. Hope it clears ur doubt..

please consider KUDOS if my post helped..thank you.

2016MBAcandidate · Answer

Isn't option B acting as strengthener?

Argument says that net designed for specific size and shape....In option B it is said that endangered species are larger than the species attractive to fishermen.If new net is designed specifically for small species attractive to fisherman,then larger endangered species may not get caught.Thus,strengthening the conclusion.

KyleWiddison · Answer

B is actually functioning as a weakener. The nets are designed for the size and shape of the commercial fish. Think about how the nets work...bigger items get caught while smaller ones safely swim through. If the endangered species are the same size as the commercial fish, they too would get caught in the nets - thus weakening the conclusion.

KW

tuanquang269 · Answer

Bottom trawling is a type of deep-sea fishing that involves dragging a large net along the bottom of the ocean, and it results in catching and killing many unintended species, some of which are endangered. Environmental advocates, concerned for these endangered marine species, have recommended that commercial fishers use a new set of nets, each designed specifically for the size and shape and pheromones (chemical attractors) of an individual marine species targeted by the commercial fishers. Environmentalists hope use of these new nets will protect the endangered marine species without interrupting commercial deep-sea fishing.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that use of the new nets will have the intended effects?
 
(A) The pheromones that would most attract the food species sought by commercial fishers indicate the presence of a dangerous threat to most of the endangered marine species 
(B) Some endangered marine species are particularly large, as large any species targeted by commercial deep-sea fishing.
(C) Most of the newly design nets are not significantly more expensive than a typical bottom trawling system.
(D) Catching unintended, endangered species adds nothing to the profits of a commercial deep-sea fishing company.
(E) Freshwater fishers often increase the odds of catching a desired fish, and avoid catching unintended species, by the specific design of the fishing hook.

The OA will be provided in the next 24 hours

Carcass · Answer

All answer choices but A are out of scope

Hope this helps. I m non fully convinced that is a 700 level question

Regards

Konstantin1983 · Answer

I am a little bir confused by option A. Who has pheromones? Marine species or net? Looks like marine species. But from option A what pheromones would attract marine species? Pheromones in the new net?

msk0657 · Answer

Bottom trawling is a type of deep-sea fishing that involves dragging a large net along the bottom of the ocean, and it results in catching and killing many unintended species, some of which are endangered. Environmental advocates, concerned for these endangered marine species, have recommended that commercial fishers use a new set of nets, each designed specifically for the size and shape and pheromones (chemical attractors) of an individual marine species targeted by the commercial fishers. Environmentalists hope use of these new nets will protect the endangered marine species without interrupting commercial deep-sea fishing.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that use of the new nets will have the intended effects?

(A) The pheromones that would most attract the food species sought by commercial fishers indicate the presence of a dangerous threat to most of the endangered marine species.

(B) Some endangered marine species are particularly large, as large any species targeted by commercial deep-sea fishing.

(C) Most of the newly design nets are not significantly more expensive than a typical bottom trawling system.

(D) Catching unintended, endangered species adds nothing to the profits of a commercial deep-sea fishing company.

(E) Freshwater fishers often increase the odds of catching a desired fish, and avoid catching unintended species, by the specific design of the fishing hook.

Show Answer

Official Answer

Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/Login.

Divyadisha · Answer

(A) The pheromones that would most attract the food species sought by commercial fishers indicate the presence of a dangerous threat to most of the endangered marine species .  If pheromones indicate dangerous threat to endangered species while increasing food species, the plan will be successful.

(B) Some endangered marine species are particularly large, as large any species targeted by commercial deep-sea fishing.  If endangered species are large, then they might not be able to escape. plan will not be successful.

(C) Most of the newly design nets are not significantly more expensive than a typical bottom trawling system.  Price is not discussed.

(D) Catching unintended, endangered species adds nothing to the profits of a commercial deep-sea fishing company.  Its good, but we want to know if the plan will be successful.

(E) Freshwater fishers often increase the odds of catching a desired fish, and avoid catching unintended species, by the specific design of the fishing hook.  Increasing the odds of catching desired fishes is not helpful

Konstantin1983 · Answer

Thanks msk0657! Now a little bit clear. But still hard to imagine a net that imitates marines pheromones

msk0657 · Answer

Dear Konstantin1983, I know this question is hard to imagine in that way, but in CR based questions we need to take everything as accurate and correct whatever is given in the argument, even though it is incorrect or impossible in the real world.

zoezhuyan · Answer

Hi  mikemcgarry  and other experts, 
For option C , I have another approach but I am not sure whether it is valid, would you please help check ?

The question states which can support that use of new nets will arrival it's exception.
I think this stem need a strengthen based on use of new nets, so I wont consider whether fishers use new nets or not.

C indicates it is likely for fishers to use new nets because it is cheap, 
So I did not pick up C.

my approach is far away with yours, I am not sure whether mine is valid.

Please help check

thanks in advance

have a nice day
>_~

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear zoezhuyan , I'm happy to respond. :-)

How are you? I don't understand your sentence: " The question states which can support that use of new nets will arrival it's exception ." To be perfectly honest, I don't know what you are trying to say. Because I can't understand this, I can't comment on your approach. The prompt is: " Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the claim that use of the new nets will have the intended effects ?", and the " intended effects " are " the endangered marine species without interrupting commercial deep-sea fishing ." Perhaps you can clarify, my friend. :-)

Mike

zoezhuyan · Answer

Hi  mikemcgarry ,

Sorry for my ambiguous sentence. 
Sorry for my late reply because I was busy with preparation for CNY (Chinese New Year )
My former intended that  arrival it's exception  is replaced with  intended effect , which means protect the engender marine species .

Please let my clarify my question.
First, I want to cite 2 scenarios :
#1 /
 A: Have you checked C's plan?
B: Yes, I have done it last Sunday.
  A: What do you think of the plan's intended effect ?
B: Bla bla bla..
 
#2/
 A: What do you think of the plan's intended effect ?
B: Bla bla bla..

Scenario #1, there is a statement that B has read the plan.
Scenario #2, there is an assumption that B has read the plan.

So, my reason is if at the beginning, A raised a question that What do you think of the plan's intended effect , then, A must based on the assumption that B has read the plan.
Like this reason, if the argument raised a question about intended effect, then I based on the assumption that the commercial fishers will use the new nets.

Therefore, I will eliminate answer if it discuss whether the commercial fishers will use new nets or not.
Here, answer C intends to discuss whether commercial fishers will use new ones or not.
That's my cross off - reasoning.

Genuinely want your recommendations about my faults

Thanks in advance.

Have a nice day
>_~

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear zoezhuyan , Happy new year, my friend! Happy Year of the Rooster! I'm happy to respond. :-)

Unfortunately, your question is still hard to follow. One problem concerns the confusing use of letters. Normally, I would think that (A), (B), and (C) would refer to the answer choices in this question. Instead, I think what you have done is create an imaginary dialogue and given the characters these letter names. Now, an imaginary dialogue to illustrate a point is fine, but it's very confusing to use the same letters for characters as for answer choices. A dialogue among characters P, Q, and R would be perfectly fine. Even assuming that the letter refer to characters in the dialogue, and not answer choices, what you are asking is still unusual. If I understand your question correct, I would say that the the distinction you are drawing doesn't matter. Suppose I execute Plan J, with the intention that, say, more money goes to School Q. Then, suppose I leave the country or somehow never hear about School Q again. Now, zoezhuyan comes along and enacts Plan K, which happens to support Plan J. As a result of zoezhuyan enacting Plan K, it happens that School Q gets all the money it needs. In this scenario, even though I am totally out of the picture, my intended effect was still realized. It doesn't matter at all whether I am present or aware for my intended effect to be realized. Also, it doesn't matter whether zoezhuyan had the same intention. Maybe zoezhuyan didn't know a single thing about School Q or Plan J and simply was enacting Plan K for some other unrelated reason altogether. Even if it were "by accident" that School Q wound up getting money, an unintended consequence that was off everyone's radar, even then, it is still true that my intended effect was realized. I don't know whether this answers your question. Let me know. Mike :-)

subrataroy0210 · Answer

Bottom trawling is a type of deep-sea fishing that involves dragging a large net along the bottom of the ocean, and it results in catching and killing many unintended species, some of which are endangered. Environmental advocates, concerned for these endangered marine species, have recommended that commercial fishers use a new set of nets, each designed specifically for the size and shape and pheromones (chemical attractors) of an individual marine species targeted by the commercial fishers. Environmentalists hope use of these new nets will protect the endangered marine species without interrupting commercial deep-sea fishing.

Which of the following, if true,  most strongly supports the claim that use of the new nets will have the intended effects ?

The environmentalists' claim: new nets will protect the endangered marine species without interrupting commercial deep-sea fishing.
New nets: designed specifically for the size and shape and contains pheromones (chemical attractors) of an individual marine species targeted by the commercial fishers.

Possible Strengthners: 1) Most of the endangered species are not of the size of the fishes that are caught.
 2) The pheromones do not attract the endangered species.

A.) The pheromones that would most attract the food species sought by commercial fishers indicate the presence of a dangerous threat to most of the endangered marine species.

This is in line with the Possible Strengthener 2. If the pheromones repel the endangered species that's a good thing, right?

B.) Some endangered marine species are particularly large, as large any species targeted by commercial deep-sea fishing.

Some can be, say 40 species out of 100 endangered species. Therefore, it is no good to support the new nets.

C.) Most of the newly design nets are not significantly more expensive than a typical bottom trawling system.

Cost was never a factor. This point is irrelevant.

D.) Catching unintended, endangered species adds nothing to the profits of a commercial deep-sea fishing company.

Out of context. Here we are trying not to catch the endangered species and not trying to figure out what good they do after they have been caught.

E.) Freshwater fishers often increase the odds of catching a desired fish, and avoid catching unintended species, by the specific design of the fishing hook.

Sea waters are not freshwater. So we cannot draw an analogy. Moreover, in freshwater use the of fishing hook is discussed.

Thus, option A.

Bottom trawling is a type of deep-sea fishing that involves dragging a

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Bottom trawling is a type of deep-sea fishing that involves dragging a

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia