In the 1960s, surveys of Florida's alligator population indicated that the population was dwindling rapidly. Hunting alligators was banned. By the early 1990s, the alligator population had recovered, and restricted hunting was allowed. Over the course of the 1990s, reports of alligators appearing on golf courses and lawns increased dramatically. Therefore, in spite of whatever alligator hunting went on, the alligator population must have increased significantly over the decade of the 1990s. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument? A. The human population of Florida increased significantly during the 1990s. B. The hunting restrictions applied to commercial as well as private hunters. C. The number of sightings of alligators in lakes and swamps increased greatly in Florida during the 1990s. D. Throughout the 1990s, selling alligator products was more strictly regulated than hunting was. E. Most of the sightings of alligators on golf courses and lawns in the 1990s occurred at times at which few people were present on those golf courses and lawns. CR91630.02

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

May 25
All GMAT Club Tests are free and open on Memorial Day, Monday, May 25th
12:01 AM PDT
-
11:59 PM PDT
On the 25th, GMAT Club Tests will be Free! Including all the Quizzes, Questions, and Tests. 12 AM - 11:59 PM PST
May 21
Summer savings start now on Manhattan Prep Courses!
10:00 AM EDT
-
11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products.
May 22
This Memorial Day, rise to 700+
12:30 AM EDT
-
01:30 AM EDT
From 535→695 to 735 in one shot — GMATWhiz students prove what focused prep can achieve. Get up to 44% OFF on expert-guided, AI-driven GMAT prep with mentor support. Plans from $149.
May 22
Magoosh is having a sale!
11:00 AM EDT
-
11:59 PM EDT
Take 30% off all study plans with code PICNIC - Expires on Monday, May 25th
May 27
From ‘GMAT Is Not for Me’ to a 695— Beating Her Target by 50 Points
12:30 AM EDT
-
01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
May 31
Free full-length test!
02:00 PM PDT
-
03:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Jun 10
MBA Spotlight Fair
06:00 AM PDT
-
06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..

Back to Forum

Create Topic

In the 1960s, surveys of Florida's alligator population indicated that

1 2 3 4

AditiDeokar

Joined: 12 Jan 2025

Last visit: 21 May 2026

Posts: 86

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 298

Location: India

Concentration: Finance

Schools: NUS ESSEC MiM '26 ESSEC MiF '26 INSEAD MiM '26 ESADE Imperial ISB '26 ESADE HEC Sept '26 IE INSEAD Jan '26

GMAT Focus 1: 525 Q77 V77 DI74 Verified score

GPA: 3.5

Schools: NUS ESSEC MiM '26 ESSEC MiF '26 INSEAD MiM '26 ESADE Imperial ISB '26 ESADE HEC Sept '26 IE INSEAD Jan '26

GMAT Focus 1: 525 Q77 V77 DI74 Verified score

Posts: 86

Kudos: 21

Updated on: 22 Dec 2025, 03:47

Originally posted by AditiDeokar on 22 Dec 2025, 03:17.
Last edited by Bunuel on 22 Dec 2025, 03:47, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos

Bookmarks

Below video helps explain the discrepancy for option E:

suscipitmagni

Joined: 09 Oct 2025

Last visit: 24 May 2026

Posts: 2

Given Kudos: 7

Posts: 2

Kudos: 0

Updated on: 26 Apr 2026, 10:27

Originally posted by suscipitmagni on 26 Apr 2026, 08:36.
Last edited by Bunuel on 26 Apr 2026, 10:27, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos

Bookmarks

Can we also say that more people would mean that more number of golf courses in the aligator habitat and hence more aligator sightings?

itspC

This was a tough one: had to infer and infer again:

B) So what it's already mentioned in the argument n this is a subcategory. It's not weakening anything
C) This strengthens conclusion
D) Irrelevant and somewhat strengthens as restrictions less>>> more hunting
E)So does that actually change anything?

NOW: A) Human population increased>>> more people>>> more sightings of alligators (even if the population of them is same or decreased)

Man, this was a quality question have to double infer this to get the answer. Though all other options were easy to eliminate may fall for this as at 1st it seemed irrelevant. Therefore lesson learned: don't eliminate anything if it seems irrelevant at 1st sigh rather infer the data

guddo

Joined: 25 May 2021

Last visit: 24 May 2026

Posts: 1,227

Own Kudos:

12,040

[1]

Given Kudos: 32

Posts: 1,227

Kudos: 12,040

[1]

26 Apr 2026, 10:45

Kudos

Bookmarks

suscipitmagni

Can we also say that more people would mean that more number of golf courses in the aligator habitat and hence more aligator sightings?

I'd say yes. That is a valid way to see it.

If Florida’s human population increased a lot, then more golf courses, lawns, and houses may have been built in or near alligator habitat. So reports of alligator sightings could rise simply because there were more points of contact between humans and alligators, not necessarily because the alligator population itself increased significantly.