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

 It is currently 27 May 2017, 21:06

### 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 the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Status: Prevent and prepare. Not repent and repair!!
Joined: 13 Feb 2010
Posts: 260
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GPA: 3.75
WE: Sales (Telecommunications)
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 97 [2] , given: 282

In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Jan 2013, 11:02
2
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

84% (02:12) correct 16% (01:22) wrong based on 115 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near extinction of the black Rhino and the African elephant.As a result, numerous African nations supported a complete ban on all ivory sales. This ban has been in effect since 1989. The governments of South Africa,Botswana and Namibia have recently put up for auction thousands of tons of confiscated Ivory horns and tusks, in spite of the continued moratorium. However, the three governments have the support of the same conversationalists who help impose the 1989 ban on the ivory sales.

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of why conversationalists support SA's, Botswana's and Namibia's auction of ivory?

a. The international demand for ivory has decreased since 1989.
b. Most wild elephants and rhinos live outside SA,Botswana and Namibia.
c. Once the tons of confiscated ivory are auctioned, the market will be flooded with ivory making poaching economically impractical.
d. If it were not for the auction, the confiscated ivory could never be used and would have to remain in govt warehouses.
e. Due to major conservation efforts, black rhino and african elephant populations have slowly but steadily increased in the last few years.

OA later...
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

I've failed over and over and over again in my life and that is why I succeed--Michael Jordan
Kudos drives a person to better himself every single time. So Pls give it generously
Wont give up till i hit a 700+

If you have any questions
New!
Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3175
Followers: 860

Kudos [?]: 7320 [1] , given: 1065

Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Jan 2013, 12:08
1
KUDOS
C for me is the only answer makes sense
_________________
Manager
Joined: 27 Feb 2012
Posts: 136
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 22

Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Jan 2013, 16:22
Quote:
In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near extinction of the black Rhino and the African elephant.As a result, numerous African nations supported a complete ban on all ivory sales. This ban has been in effect since 1989. The governments of South Africa,Botswana and Namibia have recently put up for auction thousands of tons of confiscated Ivory horns and tusks, in spite of the continued moratorium. However, the three governments have the support of the same conversationalists who help impose the 1989 ban on the ivory sales.

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of why conversationalists support SA's, Botswana's and Namibia's auction of ivory?

a. The international demand for ivory has decreased since 1989.
b. Most wild elephants and rhinos live outside SA,Botswana and Namibia.
c. Once the tons of confiscated ivory are auctioned, the market will be flooded with ivory making poaching economically impractical.
d. If it were not for the auction, the confiscated ivory could never be used and would have to remain in govt warehouses.
e. Due to major conservation efforts, black rhino and african elephant populations have slowly but steadily increased in the last few years.

OA later...

I will go for C.
If something is available legally, people will avoid buying illegal thing.
_________________

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

Current Student
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 2005
Concentration: Finance
Followers: 68

Kudos [?]: 643 [0], given: 355

Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2013, 10:47
rajathpanta wrote:
In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near extinction of the black Rhino and the African elephant.As a result, numerous African nations supported a complete ban on all ivory sales. This ban has been in effect since 1989. The governments of South Africa,Botswana and Namibia have recently put up for auction thousands of tons of confiscated Ivory horns and tusks, in spite of the continued moratorium. However, the three governments have the support of the same conversationalists who help impose the 1989 ban on the ivory sales.

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of why conversationalists support SA's, Botswana's and Namibia's auction of ivory?

a. The international demand for ivory has decreased since 1989.
b. Most wild elephants and rhinos live outside SA,Botswana and Namibia.
c. Once the tons of confiscated ivory are auctioned, the market will be flooded with ivory making poaching economically impractical.
d. If it were not for the auction, the confiscated ivory could never be used and would have to remain in govt warehouses.
e. Due to major conservation efforts, black rhino and african elephant populations have slowly but steadily increased in the last few years.

OA later...

This has to be (D), which means that the horns and tusks are not from killing new animals but from past ones that were already killed and that these remain in gvmnt warehouses, therefore no damage is done, since it is a sunk cost and furthermore, the increase in supply could decrease efforts to continue endangering the species to a minor extent. Although this last part is not really the most important part in explaining to why the correct answer is (D)
Manager
Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 87
Location: Brazil
GMAT 1: 660 Q45 V35
GMAT 2: 710 Q49 V38
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 45

Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Nov 2013, 14:51
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
RESOLVE THE PARADOX: The conversationalists are supporting three governments in Africa to auction thousands of tons of ivory, despite the efforts to ban poaching.

PRE-PHRASE AN ANSWER: I have to think an answer that benefits both sides and controversionalists are assured that poaching will be ceased.

Wait! D can't be a good answer - because it only shows the advantage to the government. How about the the controversionalists? When are they benefited? Oh, I see that C shows this so-callled benefit and, therefore, is a better answer.

rajathpanta wrote:
In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near extinction of the black Rhino and the African elephant.As a result, numerous African nations supported a complete ban on all ivory sales. This ban has been in effect since 1989. The governments of South Africa,Botswana and Namibia have recently put up for auction thousands of tons of confiscated Ivory horns and tusks, in spite of the continued moratorium. However, the three governments have the support of the same conversationalists who help impose the 1989 ban on the ivory sales.

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of why conversationalists support SA's, Botswana's and Namibia's auction of ivory?

a. The international demand for ivory has decreased since 1989.
b. Most wild elephants and rhinos live outside SA,Botswana and Namibia.
c. Once the tons of confiscated ivory are auctioned, the market will be flooded with ivory making poaching economically impractical.
d. If it were not for the auction, the confiscated ivory could never be used and would have to remain in govt warehouses.
e. Due to major conservation efforts, black rhino and african elephant populations have slowly but steadily increased in the last few years.

OA later...
Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
Posts: 157
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Medicine and Health (Health Care)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 72 [0], given: 84

Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2013, 21:46
rajathpanta wrote:
In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near extinction of the black Rhino and the African elephant.As a result, numerous African nations supported a complete ban on all ivory sales. This ban has been in effect since 1989. The governments of South Africa,Botswana and Namibia have recently put up for auction thousands of tons of confiscated Ivory horns and tusks, in spite of the continued moratorium. However, the three governments have the support of the same conversationalists who help impose the 1989 ban on the ivory sales.

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of why conversationalists support SA's, Botswana's and Namibia's auction of ivory?

a. The international demand for ivory has decreased since 1989.
b. Most wild elephants and rhinos live outside SA,Botswana and Namibia.
c. Once the tons of confiscated ivory are auctioned, the market will be flooded with ivory making poaching economically impractical.
d. If it were not for the auction, the confiscated ivory could never be used and would have to remain in govt warehouses.
e. Due to major conservation efforts, black rhino and african elephant populations have slowly but steadily increased in the last few years.

OA later...

Good one;
Conversationalist pressurised for ban ; now support the auction of confiscated Ivory. Hmm……………….
Its means that they have some motto of doing which has to be linked with ban.
I would have gone with C; seems that the fall in prices of ivory in market will force the poaching to stop. good.

_________________

Thanks for Posting

LEARN TO ANALYSE

+1 kudos if you like

Current Student
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 2005
Concentration: Finance
Followers: 68

Kudos [?]: 643 [0], given: 355

Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Mar 2014, 10:00

I'm pretty confident it should be D

Cheers
J
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2013
Posts: 388
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 730 Q51 V38
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 296 [1] , given: 139

Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Mar 2014, 00:38
1
KUDOS
In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near extinction of the black Rhino and the African elephant.As a result, numerous African nations supported a complete ban on all ivory sales. This ban has been in effect since 1989. The governments of South Africa,Botswana and Namibia have recently put up for auction thousands of tons of confiscated Ivory horns and tusks, in spite of the continued moratorium. However, the three governments have the support of the same conversationalists who help impose the 1989 ban on the ivory sales.

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of why conversationalists support SA's, Botswana's and Namibia's auction of ivory?

a. The international demand for ivory has decreased since 1989.
b. Most wild elephants and rhinos live outside SA,Botswana and Namibia.
c. Once the tons of confiscated ivory are auctioned, the market will be flooded with ivory making poaching economically impractical.
d. If it were not for the auction, the confiscated ivory could never be used and would have to remain in govt warehouses.
e. Due to major conservation efforts, black rhino and african elephant populations have slowly but steadily increased in the last few years.

I would go with C...D is kind of irrelevant

1. If the ivory were to stay in the warehouses..why should it be an issue...& specifically why should the conversationalists support it based on this factor.
2. With poaching economically impractical..Poachers too will cease to exist..

C nicely fills in the gap & resolves the paradox..

BTW..OA is C

_________________

Appreciate the efforts...KUDOS for all
Don't let an extra chromosome get you down..

Current Student
Joined: 06 Sep 2013
Posts: 2005
Concentration: Finance
Followers: 68

Kudos [?]: 643 [0], given: 355

Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Apr 2014, 16:00
JusTLucK04 wrote:
In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near extinction of the black Rhino and the African elephant.As a result, numerous African nations supported a complete ban on all ivory sales. This ban has been in effect since 1989. The governments of South Africa,Botswana and Namibia have recently put up for auction thousands of tons of confiscated Ivory horns and tusks, in spite of the continued moratorium. However, the three governments have the support of the same conversationalists who help impose the 1989 ban on the ivory sales.

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of why conversationalists support SA's, Botswana's and Namibia's auction of ivory?

a. The international demand for ivory has decreased since 1989.
b. Most wild elephants and rhinos live outside SA,Botswana and Namibia.
c. Once the tons of confiscated ivory are auctioned, the market will be flooded with ivory making poaching economically impractical.
d. If it were not for the auction, the confiscated ivory could never be used and would have to remain in govt warehouses.
e. Due to major conservation efforts, black rhino and african elephant populations have slowly but steadily increased in the last few years.

I would go with C...D is kind of irrelevant

1. If the ivory were to stay in the warehouses..why should it be an issue...& specifically why should the conversationalists support it based on this factor.
2. With poaching economically impractical..Poachers too will cease to exist..

C nicely fills in the gap & resolves the paradox..

BTW..OA is C

Agree with you buddy, I must have been drunk when I was doing this CR

Hope it helps!
Cheers
J
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10354
Followers: 1000

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

Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jul 2016, 06:01
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.
Director
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 886
Location: Malaysia
Followers: 24

Kudos [?]: 463 [0], given: 157

Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Apr 2017, 17:45
rajathpanta wrote:
In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near extinction of the black Rhino and the African elephant.As a result, numerous African nations supported a complete ban on all ivory sales. This ban has been in effect since 1989. The governments of South Africa,Botswana and Namibia have recently put up for auction thousands of tons of confiscated Ivory horns and tusks, in spite of the continued moratorium. However, the three governments have the support of the same conversationalists who help impose the 1989 ban on the ivory sales.

Which of the following, if true, contributes most to an explanation of why conversationalists support SA's, Botswana's and Namibia's auction of ivory?

a. The international demand for ivory has decreased since 1989.
b. Most wild elephants and rhinos live outside SA,Botswana and Namibia.
c. Once the tons of confiscated ivory are auctioned, the market will be flooded with ivory making poaching economically impractical.
d. If it were not for the auction, the confiscated ivory could never be used and would have to remain in govt warehouses.
e. Due to major conservation efforts, black rhino and african elephant populations have slowly but steadily increased in the last few years.

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

This type of question is what’s known as Explain the Paradox, a subcategory of Method of Reasoning questions. Something in the conclusion seems diametrically opposed to the evidence presented, and yet it is correct. Generally, some new piece of information in one of the answer choices will reconcile the seemingly opposing viewpoints. Let’s go through the choices and see which solves our dilemma.

Answer choice A indicates that the international demand for ivory has dropped significantly. If this were true, would it help explain why these governments have full support in selling excess ivory (like overstock.com)? Not really. If anything, the demand going down should dissuade anyone from trying to increase the supply of ivory as the price will drop dramatically. There’s no upside to selling ivory in this scenario.

Answer choice B indicates that most of the affected animals live outside of these three countries (although they may be expatriates). Regardless of where the animals are located, the ivory can always be shipped to South Africa or Botswana, so their initial location will not factor into the decision in any way. B is incorrect.

C indicates that flooding the market with ivory will dissuade future poaching, which is a logical and credible line of reasoning that would help reconcile both points made in the original statement. Poachers will not stop their practice just because it’s illegal if there is enough money to be made. If ivory can be freely and cheaply purchased elsewhere, then there is no need to risk legal ramifications by plying a trade that has been banned. C is a perfect solution to our paradox. For competition’s sake, we can look at D and E, although on the actual GMAT you should stop whenever you find the correct answer.

Answer choice D discusses what would happen to the ivory were it not used, inferring that there may be some cost or security concern involved in not selling the ivory. This is out of scope of the question, as selling ivory because upkeep costs are inconvenient would violate the entire purpose of the ivory moratorium. There may be some financial upside in selling the ivory, but it would not explain why the governments would have international support.

Answer choice E is somewhat tempting as it indicates that the rhinos and elephants may no longer be in danger of extinction. Logically, the animals need to be protected when they’re endangered, but when they’re running rampant then the conservation becomes unnecessary. However, had the number of animals climbed dramatically, a more logical reaction would be the removal of the moratorium, not the clandestine sale of some confiscated ivory. Answer choice E does not reconcile the paradox.
Re: In the early 20th century,ivory poaching led to near   [#permalink] 11 Apr 2017, 17:45
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 It is posited by some scientists that the near extinction of the sap- 2 15 Feb 2016, 12:42
4 The bones in a bat's wing that are near the tip have less 7 26 Aug 2014, 00:58
35 Near Chicago a newly built hydroponic spinach “factory,” 10 25 Jul 2016, 21:19
7 Some of the greatest American entrepreneurs of the 20th 19 18 Mar 2016, 21:03
7 Some of the greatest American entrepreneurs of the 20th 37 03 Jul 2016, 06:13
Display posts from previous: Sort by