Agricultural expert: Its clear that the arrival of European explorer

Question

Agricultural expert: It’s clear that the arrival of European explorers to North America led to a widespread loss of bamboo. When they first came to the continent, the explorers did not understand the many ways that bamboo can be used, and they regarded the massive canebrakes in which bamboo grew to be considerable obstacles to travel.

Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the agricultural expert’s reasoning?

A. Early European explorers to North America would sometimes need to travel miles to get around the larger canebrakes.
B. Native Americans have long understood the many uses of bamboo.
C. Most European explorers arrived in North America without having ever seen bamboo in the wild.
D. Some species of bamboo were never seen by early European explorers to North America.
E. Early European explorers to North America allowed their cattle to overgraze on bamboo.

EMPOWER  gmat    CR Question Pack 2

Question 99: North American Bamboo  
  48 Hour Answer & Explanation Window  
 Earn KUDOS!  Have your explanations evaluated to help boost your learning. Post your reasoning why the answer you chose is correct, and why the other 4 options are incorrect within 48 hours of this post.

Scroll Down For Official Explanation

◀ Question 98 
 ▶ Question 100 
 ⏏ CR Library Pack 2 Home

EMPOWERgmatVerbal · Accepted Answer

Official Explanation:

Agricultural expert: It’s clear that the arrival of European explorers to North America led to a widespread loss of bamboo. When they first came to the continent, the explorers did not understand the many ways that bamboo can be used, and they regarded the massive canebrakes in which bamboo grew to be considerable obstacles to travel. 
 
 Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the agricultural expert’s reasoning? 
 
 A. Early European explorers to North America would sometimes need to travel miles to get around the larger canebrakes.
B. Native Americans have long understood the many uses of bamboo.
C. Most European explorers arrived in North America without having ever seen bamboo in the wild.
D. Some species of bamboo were never seen by early European explorers to North America. 
 E. Early European explorers to North America allowed their cattle to overgraze on bamboo.

Question Type:   Strengthen (Assumption Family)
  Boil It Down:   Europeans caused the loss of bamboo because they did not understand how to use bamboo and because they considered places where bamboo grows as an obstacle to traverse.
  Goal:    Find the option that best strengthens the argument that Europeans are the reason caused the loss of bamboo in North America.

Analysis:  
As with all assumption family questions, we want to break the prompt down into our conclusion, and to our evidence, to figure out where the assumption is being made.
 
Evidence: 
1. Europeans did not understand the many ways bamboo could be used.
2. Europeans regarded the cranebreaks where bamboo grew as a considerable obstacle to travel
Assumption: ???
Conclusion: European explorers led to the widespread loss of bamboo.

Just right off the bat, can we see where the assumption is being made? Sure, Europeans may have been annoyed by bamboo and didn’t know how to use it, but does that evidence prove the conclusion that Europeans destroyed the bamboo somehow? I don’t think so. The author is clearly assuming something about these two pieces of evidence to make his conclusion correct.

To strengthen the agreement, then, we need to add a piece of evidence to the assumption row which makes the conclusion more likely to be true. For example, a correct answer might say “Europeans always cut down cranebreaks which make travel difficult.” Why would this strengthen it? Because the evidence simply says Europeans hated cranebreaks. The conclusion says that Europeans got rid of bamboo. Nothing connects those two. This prediction, however, would bridge the gap between evidence and conclusion. Europeans hated cranebreaks where bamboo grows because they were difficult to traverse → Europeans always cut down difficult to traverse terrains → Europeans led to the demise of bamboo.

Now, let’s find an answer choice which does something similar.

A. Early European explorers to North America would sometimes need to travel miles to get around the larger canebrakes.
 I can see why this answer can trip students up a bit. But I’ve said it before, and I will never stop saying it: Do not make assumptions in an answer choice. The only way that this is correct, is if you assume that because Europeans had to travel miles around cranebreaks, they cut them down and the bamboo with it. First, can you even cut down a cranebreak? We don’t know. Second, nothing suggests they would in fact cut them down. This answer choice is wrong.

B. Native Americans have long understood the many uses of bamboo.
 This answer choice is also wrong. Does Native Americans knowing how to use bamboo make it more likely that Europeans were the ones who destroyed it? Is it possible that Native Americans, precisely because they knew the many uses of bamboo, led to the loss of Bamboo as they overused it? This answer choice does not strengthen our conclusion.

C. Most European explorers arrived in North America without having ever seen bamboo in the wild.
 This supports our evidence that Europeans did not know the many uses of bamboo, but it does not support our conclusion in any way. Like with D, this only could be correct if you assume some sort of relation between not knowing about bamboo and getting rid of bamboo.

D. Some species of bamboo were never seen by early European explorers to North America.
 This is a very similar answer choice to C, so it’s no surprise that D is also wrong. How do some early European settlers not seeing every species of bamboo help prove that Europeans led to the widespread loss of bamboo? It’s not clear to me why, and that makes this answer choice wrong.

E. Early European explorers to North America allowed their cattle to overgraze on bamboo.
 Honestly, this is an interesting right answer choice because it does not bridge the gap. Most correct answer choices will bridge the gap between evidence and conclusion. Here, however, it’s just like adding a new piece of evidence, but it’s correct all the same. Does knowing that Europeans let their cattle overgraze on bamboo make it more likely that Europeans led to the widespread loss of bamboo? Yes. This strengthens our conclusion.

Don’t study for the GMAT. Train for it.

ViperZ90 · Answer

A. Early European explorers to North America would sometimes need to travel miles to get around the larger canebrakes.
-- Correct. Because this suggests that the larger canebrakes were impediments to there movement and since they were unaware of the use of bamboo they found it better to remove them. this strengthens the argument.

B. Native Americans have long understood the many uses of bamboo.
-- Incorrect. out of context what does the understanding of native Americans have to do with this argument

C. Most European explorers arrived in North America without having ever seen bamboo in the wild.
-- Incorrect. if they haven't seen it ever before that doesn't mean they go on and remove the canebrakes

D. Some species of bamboo were never seen by early European explorers to North America.
-- Incorrect. same as point c

E. Early European explorers to North America allowed their cattle to overgraze on bamboo.
-- Incorrect. this is out of context.

hardik1997 · Answer

A. Early European explorers to North America would sometimes need to travel miles to get around the larger canebrakes.
 -- Correct. Because this suggests that the larger canebrakes were impediments to there movement and since they were unaware of the use of bamboo they found it better to remove them. this strengthens the argument.
 
B. Native Americans have long understood the many uses of bamboo.
 -- Incorrect. out of context what does the understanding of native Americans have to do with this argument

C. Most European explorers arrived in North America without having ever seen bamboo in the wild.
 -- Incorrect. if they haven't seen it ever before that doesn't mean they go on and remove the canebrakes

D. Some species of bamboo were never seen by early European explorers to North America.
 -- Incorrect. same as point c

E. Early European explorers to North America allowed their cattle to overgraze on bamboo.
 -- Incorrect. this is out of context.

ntngocanh19 · Answer

The expert concludes the arrival of European Explorers led to the massive loss of bamboo
Because while exploring, the explorers didn't know what use of bamboo then they considered it as an obstacle in their exploration
Pre-thinking: The strengthen answer should emphasize the reason that why the explorer didn't know how to use bamboo
POE:
A. Early European explorers to North America would  sometimes  need to travel miles to get around the larger canebrakes.
 => Even when they sometimes need to travel miles to get around the larger canebrake doesn't mean they would kill the bamboo. Moreover, sometime makes this choice weaker  
B. Native Americans have long understood the many uses of bamboo.
 => Irrelevant. The argument is about the European 
C.  Most  European explorers arrived in North America without having ever seen bamboo in the wild.
 => Correct, they have never seen bamboo before, that why they don't understand many uses of bamboo. => so they consider it as an obstacle 
D.  Some  species of bamboo were never seen by early European explorers to North America.
 => Some were never seen. But others can be seen. The qualifier "some" mean from 1% to 99% => we cant conclude it's the reason for European to kill bamboo. 
E. Early European explorers to North America allowed their cattle to overgraze on bamboo.
 => This statement proposes other reason for the widespread so weaken  
Hence, IMO C

ArindamLucky · Answer

IMO C

POE:

A. Early European explorers to North America would sometimes need to travel miles to get around the larger canebrakes. -->  Sometimes they would need to travel and not always so it won't lead to loss of bamboo 
B. Native Americans have long understood the many uses of bamboo. -->  Out of context. We are talking about European explorers 
C. Most European explorers arrived in North America without having ever seen bamboo in the wild. -->  Makes sense. If they have not seen then they wouldn't know about it and its uses etc. 
D. Some species of bamboo were never seen by early European explorers to North America. -->  Okay some species they might not have seen but some species they would have seen too right? Incorrect 
E. Early European explorers to North America allowed their cattle to overgraze on bamboo. -->  We are not concerned about cattle. Out of context

ManavAgrawal · Answer

A. Early European explorers to North America would sometimes need to travel miles to get around the larger canebrakes.(if they need to travel miles(plural that is more than a km) then it is reasonable to cut down bamboos.
B. Native Americans have long understood the many uses of bamboo. ( does not support as they already knew about bamboo, so they wont cut it down)
C. Most European explorers arrived in North America without having ever seen bamboo in the wild. ( so they have not seen it in the wild, but they might have seen it in farms and understood the benefits, so eliminate this option)
D. Some species of bamboo were never seen by early European explorers to North America. (Only some speicies were not seen, not all, so even if they saw only 1 species and examined it, they might try to do the same with the new species of bamboo, so eliminate)
E. Early European explorers to North America allowed their cattle to overgraze on bamboo. (This supports the loss of bamboo, but does not support the reasoning, so eliminate the option)

We are left with option A, so I chose that one.

Posted from my mobile device

AnirudhaS · Answer

A. Early European explorers to North America would sometimes need to travel miles to get around the larger canebrakes.
C. Most European explorers arrived in North America without having ever seen bamboo in the wild.

Between A and C, let us deep dive into each answer choices.
C says most europeans did not see bamboo in wild. But this does not mean that they could not have figured out the utility of bamboo after they came over to America.

A says some had to travel miles around. Also in the passage, it is already said that the Europeans regarded them to be obstacles. Now if indeed they had to travel more, it strengthens their claims.

IMO: A

ManavAgrawal · Answer

Your reasoning for answer A is not satisfactory, we need an option that supports the argument right. And it is stated that canebreaks were considered obstacles by Europeans, so cutting them down will strengthen the argument that Europeans led to the loss of bamboo.

Thekingmaker · Answer

it's an absolutely fa/ntastic question that's well thought it makes all the options so appealling that everything with post assumption can lead to the right answer but with the given premise it's pretty diffuclt let's weed out the options and make you undergo the vigour of process of elemination 
A- it states that Europeans had to travel long distances around the bamboo it doesn't help us understand whether all of this was committed in the venerance of the bamboo or when thought otherwise should have been the bamboo has to be cut down , since both explanation are equally likely we have to eleminate this
B - this ain't helping our conclusion our main intent is to find out whether the Europeans liked it or not OUT
C-yes thsi could be a reason however this also has a catch because it feels like a double edged sword as it supports that either they didn't know anything about the bamboo and cut down all of them or they were fascinated they didn't do anything
D - if they have seen one type of species they would have understood the merits pretty well -OUT 
E - yes this is a valid reason as of why they are doing this they didn't undestand the benefits hence lead/ to the ruthless exploitaion ...hence IMO E

these are my personal views youre welcome to debate , deliberate , instigate and crossexamining .....happy competiting 
See you at the top of the table

kntombat · Answer

I do not agree with the explanation provided as to why A is wrong and E is correct.
can anyone help?

Konstantin1983 · Answer

Lets start from the conclusion - An expert talks about widespreas loss of bamboo. So we need to find an argument that helps to strenghten the conclusion. Answer A doesn't do this since number of miles that Europeans needed to get there doesn't matter. Whereas E does this by saying that not only Europeans damaged bamboo but also their cattle. Hope it helps!

Vishnu0001 · Answer

I have a question. What is the difference between the following two question stems:

1. "Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the agricultural expert’s reasoning?" 
 2. "Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the argument/conclusion?"

The issue for me is that the question stem talks about the  expert's reasoning and not the conclusion . Hence, I don't want to choose  Choice E  as it seems much better. But  Choice A  unfortunately doesn't bring in any additional information. In the argument, the expert already says, "... massive canebrakes in which bamboo grew to be considerable obstacles to travel."

Please, someone clarify.

Agricultural expert: Its clear that the arrival of European explorer

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

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Agricultural expert: Its clear that the arrival of European explorer

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

My Rewards