Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 29 May 2017, 12:59

### 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

# In 1992 Outlaw fishing boats began illegally harvesting

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 25 Mar 2010
Posts: 2
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [1] , given: 0

In 1992 Outlaw fishing boats began illegally harvesting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Mar 2010, 05:01
1
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

59% (02:22) correct 41% (02:16) wrong based on 85 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In 1992 Outlaw fishing boats began illegally harvesting lobsters from the territorial waters of the country of Belukia. Soon after, the annual tonnage of lobster legally harvested in Belukian waters began declining; in 1996, despite there beging no reduction in the level of legal lobster fishing activity, the local catch was 9,000tons below pre-1992 levels. It is therefore highly likely that the outlaw fishing boats harvested about 9,000tons of lobster illegally that year.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. THe illegal lobster harvesting was not so extensive that the poplulation of catchable lobsters in Belukia's territorial waters had sharply delined by 1996.
B. The average annual lobster catch, in tons, of an outlaw fishing boat has increased lobster-fishing boats.
C.Outlaw fishing boats do not , as a group, harvest more lobsters than do licensed 9,000 tons.
D. The annual lobster harvest in Belukia in 1996 was not significantly less than 9,000tons.
E. A significant proportion of Belukia's operators of licensded lobster-fishing boats went out of business between 1992 and 1996.
If you have any questions
New!
Intern
Joined: 05 Feb 2010
Posts: 2
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

25 Mar 2010, 06:48
is it D?
BSchool Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Oct 2009
Posts: 593
GMAT 1: 530 Q47 V17
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V36
Followers: 38

Kudos [?]: 354 [0], given: 412

### Show Tags

27 Mar 2010, 08:06
It should be A

A states that the Quantity of Fishes is more or less the same in 92 & 96.
This assumption is really required.
Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2010
Posts: 242
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 16

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2010, 09:04
A is the best; it emphasizes that the A(the legal catch)+B(illegal catch)= A(legal catch in 1992)+B(legal catch in 1992) only if B did not decrease because of overfishing by 1997.

I had D as a contender as well, but eliminated it after reading A. Moreover, the illegal catch does not contribute to the country's annual output (hopefully !!!)
Manager
Joined: 03 Feb 2010
Posts: 68
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 64 [0], given: 4

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2010, 09:26
ans A.

A is the necessary assumption,nowhere in argument they focussed on lobster overall population.
and linked decline in lobster catch ---> decline in illegal catch of lobster.
so they definately assumed that the overall population of lobster has been constant .
Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 200
Concentration: General Management, Sustainability
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 12

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2010, 10:42
I go with D. What is the OA please?
Manager
Joined: 18 Mar 2010
Posts: 88
Location: United States
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 5

### Show Tags

09 Apr 2010, 09:32
Agree with A. The lobster population would need to remain the same in 1996 as 1992 in order to make the argument work.

I don't understand why D would be an option. The total harvest shouldn't matter. I think D says the harvest did not reduce by more than half, right?

Last edited by mmphf on 29 Apr 2010, 14:33, edited 1 time in total.
Director
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 941
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Followers: 77

Kudos [?]: 1330 [0], given: 40

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2010, 07:27
Can anyone explain A in more detail?
_________________

Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Manager
Joined: 18 Mar 2010
Posts: 88
Location: United States
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 5

### Show Tags

29 Apr 2010, 14:46
ykaiim wrote:
Can anyone explain A in more detail?

The way I read the statement, is that in 92, the illegal lobster pirates, started eating into the legal lobster harvest, and thus decreasing the legal lobsters. The point of the argument, is that how ever many illegal lobsters are pulled out of the water, the legal lobsters harvest decline by exactly that amount. Thus if legal lobsters declined by 9000 tons in 96, then there must have been 9000 tons of illegal lobsters that year.

But there could be other reasons for the legal lobster decline. Such as the illegal lobster pirates fished out of the water so much between 92 and 96, that there are simply not as many lobsters any more. But A says that definitely did not happen. The argument depends on this definitely not happening.

Director
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 941
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Followers: 77

Kudos [?]: 1330 [0], given: 40

### Show Tags

29 Apr 2010, 20:57
Does this mean that the lobster couldnt breed and grow in population in 96?

Argument says: LEGAL lobster catching was as usual but still 9000 tons less harvest.
Conclusion: Outlaw fishing boats harvested about 9,000 tons of lobster illegally that year.

This is still confusing.

mmphf wrote:
ykaiim wrote:
Can anyone explain A in more detail?

The way I read the statement, is that in 92, the illegal lobster pirates, started eating into the legal lobster harvest, and thus decreasing the legal lobsters. The point of the argument, is that how ever many illegal lobsters are pulled out of the water, the legal lobsters harvest decline by exactly that amount. Thus if legal lobsters declined by 9000 tons in 96, then there must have been 9000 tons of illegal lobsters that year.

But there could be other reasons for the legal lobster decline. Such as the illegal lobster pirates fished out of the water so much between 92 and 96, that there are simply not as many lobsters any more. But A says that definitely did not happen. The argument depends on this definitely not happening.

_________________

Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Manager
Joined: 18 Mar 2010
Posts: 88
Location: United States
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 5

### Show Tags

30 Apr 2010, 13:33
ykaiim wrote:
Does this mean that the lobster couldnt breed and grow in population in 96?

Argument says: LEGAL lobster catching was as usual but still 9000 tons less harvest.
Conclusion: Outlaw fishing boats harvested about 9,000 tons of lobster illegally that year.

This is still confusing.

Um yeah, it's still confusing cause I still do not see the OA! Please post danji628.

"A" says that the population, whether they breeded or not, did not sharply decline. If you do not agree with "A" what do you think the answer is? The other ones do not work for me at all, and you only need to pick the best answer, not the most perfect answer.
SVP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1536
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 1204 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

28 Jul 2010, 15:16
OA is A.
_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10303
Followers: 1001

Kudos [?]: 225 [0], given: 0

Re: In 1992 Outlaw fishing boats began illegally harvesting [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2016, 08:13
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: In 1992 Outlaw fishing boats began illegally harvesting   [#permalink] 02 Sep 2016, 08:13
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
14 In 1992 outlaw fishing boats began illegally harvesting 5 20 Aug 2016, 04:39
1 Lockeport's commercial fishing boats use gill nets, which 4 21 Oct 2012, 20:48
3 The fishing industry 4 19 Oct 2016, 04:52
65 In 1992 outlaw fishing boats began illegally harvesting 20 21 Dec 2016, 11:42
For a local government to outlaw all strikes by its workers 7 19 May 2017, 08:52
Display posts from previous: Sort by