It is currently 12 Dec 2017, 03:21

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 77

Kudos [?]: 171 [3], given: 0

Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 17:19
3
KUDOS
36
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

49% (01:46) correct 51% (02:07) wrong based on 1525 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 66
Page: 143
Difficulty:

Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open to any user) would always be used less carefully than private grazing land. Each rancher would be tempted to overuse common land because the benefits would accrue to the individuals, while the costs of reduced land quality that results from overuse would be spread among all users. But a study comparing 217 million acres of common grazing land with 433 million acres of private grazing land showed that the common land was in better condition.

Which of the following, if true and known by the ranchers, would best help explain the results of the study?

(A): With private grazing land, both the costs and the benefits of overuse fall to the individual user.
(B): The cost in reduced land quality that is attributable to any individual user is less easily measured with common land than it is with private land.
(C): An individual who overuses common grazing land might be able to achieve higher returns than other uses can, with the result that he or she would obtain a competitive advantage.
(D): If one user of common land overuses it even slightly, the other users are likely to do so even more, with the consequence that the costs to each user outweigh the benefits.
(E): There are more acres of grazing hand held privately than there are held in common.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Best regards,

Kudos [?]: 171 [3], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5032

Kudos [?]: 456 [5], given: 0

Location: Singapore
Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 17:58
5
KUDOS
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Before I start, try not to post the OA until most people has a shot at it.

Conclusion: Common grazing land is in better condition than private grazing land even though common grazing land tend to be overused.

Which of the following, if true and known by the ranchers, would best help explain the results of the study?

(A): With private grazing land, both the costs and the benefits of overuse fall to the individual user.
- does not explain why common grazing land is in a better shape, or why private grazing land is in a poorer condition

(B): The cost in reduced land quality that is attributable to any individual user is less easily measured with common land than it is with private land.
- Again provides us with no useful information why common land is in a better shape

(C): An individual who overuses common grazing land might be able to achieve higher returns than other uses can, with the result that he or she would obtain a competitive advantage.
- out of scope.

(D): If one user of common land overuses it even slightly, the other users are likely to do so even more, with the consequence that the costs to each user outweigh the benefits.
- If this was true, common land would be less appealing to ranchers and they would rather use private grazing land than common grazing land. The consequence would be a lower quality private grazing land.

(E): There are more acres of grazing hand held privately than there are held in common.
- not important. All it tells us is there are more private grazing land than common grazing land.

(D) it is.

Kudos [?]: 456 [5], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 77

Kudos [?]: 171 [0], given: 0

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2005, 06:00
Hello ywilfred,
First of all, sorry for my late response, but I couldn't have a chance to access to my emails due to BIZ trip through most of this week.

Thank you very much for your kind explanation. Let me have just one question to your statements below. In regards to (D), you are stating if this was true, common land would be less appealing to ranchers....., can you explain why "common land would be less appealing to rancher if (D) was true?

From CR statement, I saw it is natural that one rancher use more common land, since the cost of reduced land quality is spread among all users.

Look forward to your kind response. Thank you.

ywilfred wrote:
Before I start, try not to post the OA until most people has a shot at it.

Conclusion: Common grazing land is in better condition than private grazing land even though common grazing land tend to be overused.

Which of the following, if true and known by the ranchers, would best help explain the results of the study?

(A): With private grazing land, both the costs and the benefits of overuse fall to the individual user.
- does not explain why common grazing land is in a better shape, or why private grazing land is in a poorer condition

(B): The cost in reduced land quality that is attributable to any individual user is less easily measured with common land than it is with private land.
- Again provides us with no useful information why common land is in a better shape

(C): An individual who overuses common grazing land might be able to achieve higher returns than other uses can, with the result that he or she would obtain a competitive advantage.
- out of scope.

(D): If one user of common land overuses it even slightly, the other users are likely to do so even more, with the consequence that the costs to each user outweigh the benefits.
- If this was true, common land would be less appealing to ranchers and they would rather use private grazing land than common grazing land. The consequence would be a lower quality private grazing land.

(E): There are more acres of grazing hand held privately than there are held in common.
- not important. All it tells us is there are more private grazing land than common grazing land.

(D) it is.

_________________

Best regards,

Kudos [?]: 171 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5032

Kudos [?]: 456 [2], given: 0

Location: Singapore
Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2005, 08:21
2
KUDOS
Taku wrote:
Hello ywilfred,
First of all, sorry for my late response, but I couldn't have a chance to access to my emails due to BIZ trip through most of this week.

Thank you very much for your kind explanation. Let me have just one question to your statements below. In regards to (D), you are stating if this was true, common land would be less appealing to ranchers....., can you explain why "common land would be less appealing to rancher if (D) was true?

From CR statement, I saw it is natural that one rancher use more common land, since the cost of reduced land quality is spread among all users.

Look forward to your kind response. Thank you.

ywilfred wrote:
Before I start, try not to post the OA until most people has a shot at it.

Conclusion: Common grazing land is in better condition than private grazing land even though common grazing land tend to be overused.

Which of the following, if true and known by the ranchers, would best help explain the results of the study?

(A): With private grazing land, both the costs and the benefits of overuse fall to the individual user.
- does not explain why common grazing land is in a better shape, or why private grazing land is in a poorer condition

(B): The cost in reduced land quality that is attributable to any individual user is less easily measured with common land than it is with private land.
- Again provides us with no useful information why common land is in a better shape

(C): An individual who overuses common grazing land might be able to achieve higher returns than other uses can, with the result that he or she would obtain a competitive advantage.
- out of scope.

(D): If one user of common land overuses it even slightly, the other users are likely to do so even more, with the consequence that the costs to each user outweigh the benefits.
- If this was true, common land would be less appealing to ranchers and they would rather use private grazing land than common grazing land. The consequence would be a lower quality private grazing land.

(E): There are more acres of grazing hand held privately than there are held in common.
- not important. All it tells us is there are more private grazing land than common grazing land.

(D) it is.

Hi Taku,
Choice (D) says:
- One use of common land overuses it slightly
- The other users also likely to overuse the common land
- Consequence are the costs to each user outweight the benefits

We know from the passage, that a rancher would be 'tempted to overuse common land because the benefits would accrue to the individuals'.
Now if everyone overuses the common land to the extend the consequence now outweigh the benefits, then the rancher would be less attracted to use it since the quality of the land has dropped.

Kudos [?]: 456 [2], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 77

Kudos [?]: 171 [0], given: 0

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2005, 08:57
Hi ywilfred,
Good day to you! Thank you for your quick response. Yes, I think I fully understand your explanation regarding (D).

I now understand the issue is which has a merit for the rancher, cost or benefit. Because the cost outweights the benefit, the common land was in better condition that the private one, correct?

Have a great weekend.

Taku
_________________

Best regards,

Kudos [?]: 171 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5032

Kudos [?]: 456 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore
Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2005, 09:00
Glad to know you've understand the explanation, I'm sometimes bad at phrasing my sentences. Have a great weekend, and goodluck with your gmat prep.

Kudos [?]: 456 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Posts: 94

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 0

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2006, 09:12
Hardin argued that grazing land held in common (that is, open to any user) would always be used less carefully than private grazing land. Each rancher would be tempted to overuse common land because the benefits would accrue to the individual, while the costs of reduced land quality that results from overuse would be spread among all users. But a study comparing 217 million acres of common grazing land with 433 million acres of private grazing land showed that the common land was in better condition

Which of the following, if true, and known by the ranchers, would best help explain the results of the study?
(A) With private grazing land, both the costs and the benefits of overuse fall to the individual user.
(B) The cost in reduced land quality that is attributable to any individual user is less easily measured with common land than it is with private land.
(C) An individual who overuses common grazing land might be able to achieve higher returns than other users can, with the result that he or she would obtain a competitive advantage.
(D) If one user of common land overuses it even slightly, the other users are likely to do so even more, with the consequence that the costs to each user outweigh the benefits.
(E) There are more acres of grazing land held privately than there are held in common.

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
Posts: 700

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2006, 10:58
More usage and less cost for users in common land. i.e cost effective
So D is my answer. That'swhy common land is in good condition.

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 31 Aug 2006
Posts: 210

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2006, 11:26
Yes (D) it is.Since the Ranchers knew that if one overuses then it could affect all hence each rancher used the comman land sparingly which gave results like "a study comparing 217 million acres of common grazing land with 433 million acres of private grazing land showed that the common land was in better condition "

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 523

Kudos [?]: 71 [0], given: 0

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2006, 12:48
Agree with D.

Kudos [?]: 71 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 1161

Kudos [?]: 204 [0], given: 0

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2006, 20:19
D 2

Kudos [?]: 204 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 279

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

Location: New York
Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2006, 10:22
On more for D. The others support the first argument (that public land will be overused) and not the final analysis

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

Retired Moderator
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 1748

Kudos [?]: 447 [0], given: 49

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2006, 11:47
I am tempted to say clear D

Kudos [?]: 447 [0], given: 49

Director
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 838

Kudos [?]: 90 [5], given: 1

GMAT 1: 740 Q48 V42
Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2006, 17:01
5
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Must be D.

Rancher thinking: "Hey, Why shouldn't I let all my cattle graze on the commonland. Oh, wait a minute, if I do that, my neighbors will start doing the same and pretty soon the common land will be bare and I will have to graze all my cattle on my own land. hmmm... maybe that's not such a good idea!"

Kudos [?]: 90 [5], given: 1

VP
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1124

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 0

Location: Bangalore
Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2006, 04:33
D it is. It cleaqrly explains why the farmers will not over-use the common land.

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 0

Current Student
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 5201

Kudos [?]: 439 [0], given: 0

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2006, 07:33
Why would the ranchers want to "bite the hand that feeds them?"

Kudos [?]: 439 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Feb 2007
Posts: 350

Kudos [?]: 191 [0], given: 0

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Apr 2007, 23:04
Hardin argued that grazing land held in common (that is, open to any user) would always be used less carefully than private grazing land. Each rancher would be tempted to overuse common land because the benefits would accrue to the individual, while the costs of reduced land quality that results from overuse would be spread among all users. But a study comparing 217 million acres of common grazing land with 433 million acres of private grazing land showed that the common land was in better condition.

Which of the following, if true and known by the ranchers, would best help explain the results of the study?

(A) With private grazing land, both the costs and the benefits of overuse fall to the individual user.

(B) The cost in reduced land quality that is attributable to any individual user is less easily measured with common land than it is with private land.

(C) An individual who overuses common grazing land might be able to achieve higher returns than other users can, with the result that he or she would obtain a competitive advantage.

(D) If one user of common land overuses it even slightly, the other users are likely to do so even more, with the consequence that the costs to each user outweigh the benefits.

(E)There are more acres of grazing land held privately than there are held in common.

Kudos [?]: 191 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 851

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 0

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2007, 00:02
D it is...This shows the cautious approach of the common land grazers and hence the better condition of the common land.

Kudos [?]: 144 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1438

Kudos [?]: 226 [0], given: 13

Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2007, 00:10
Another D

Kudos [?]: 226 [0], given: 13

VP
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 1115

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 1

Location: India
Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Apr 2007, 01:21
vineetgupta wrote:
D it is...This shows the cautious approach of the common land grazers and hence the better condition of the common land.

Yes Yes
_________________

Trying hard to conquer Quant.

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 1

Re: Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open   [#permalink] 17 Apr 2007, 01:21

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 55 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by