GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 23 Jun 2018, 22:29

Close

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
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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

4 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 May 2016
Posts: 164
It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 12 Oct 2017, 17:16
4
21
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

43% (01:28) correct 57% (01:24) wrong based on 568 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbers of fish will increase, but in the case of fish such as salmon such a recovery can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(A) can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(B) would come about much more readily if governments order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow that spawning fish requires.

(C) came about much more readily if governments would order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(D) might come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(E) would have come about much more readily if governments ordered the removal of the dams that limit the water flow that fish need in order to spawn.

Originally posted by EBITDA on 17 Jun 2016, 12:40.
Last edited by hazelnut on 12 Oct 2017, 17:16, edited 3 times in total.
Edited the question.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Mar 2012
Posts: 336
Schools: Schulich '16
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jun 2016, 12:52
my guess A
was stuck between A and D
oa?
1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 10 Dec 2014
Posts: 40
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Operations
Schools: ISB '17
GPA: 4
WE: Operations (Consulting)
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jun 2016, 21:16
1
[quote="EBITDA"]It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbers of fish will increase, but in the case of fish such as salmon such a recovery can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

a) can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
hypothetical subjunctive for ( if i were to ...i would .. ) hold it as not sure about can

b) would come about much more readily if governments order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow that spawning fish requires. --
if < present tense (order)> then would -- wrong

c) came about much more readily if governments would order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

if < would order > then came -- wrong

d) might come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
same as A . and this option seems inferior to A .

e) would have come about much more readily if governments ordered the removal of the dams that limit the water flow that fish need in order to spawn.

if < past tense (ordered) > then only past tense or only would is allowed , but not would have -- wrong.



IMO A.
VP
VP
avatar
S
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 1185
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jun 2016, 21:29
i think a
present subjuctive,
in if clause, were is used, in main clause, present tense of verb is used.
_________________

visit my facebook to help me.
on facebook, my name is: thang thang thang

1 KUDOS received
VP
VP
avatar
S
Joined: 09 Jun 2010
Posts: 1185
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jun 2016, 21:37
1
hard
I think d.
there is no pattern in A
present tense in if clause, must go with present tense in main clause

past tense in if clause must go with past tense in main clause.
_________________

visit my facebook to help me.
on facebook, my name is: thang thang thang

Current Student
avatar
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 42
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Schools: IIMA (A)
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V32
GPA: 3.65
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jun 2016, 23:12
It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbers of fish will increase, but in the case of fish such as salmon such a recovery can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

a) can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
b) would come about much more readily if governments order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow that spawning fish requires.
c) came about much more readily if governments would order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
d) might come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
e) would have come about much more readily if governments ordered the removal of the dams that limit the water flow that fish need in order to spawn.

I think B

a > refers to action in past tense , hence should not be used

b> Present tense highlights the limiting of waterflow which the fish requires

c> came about much more readily is incorrect constructions

d> were to order ... past tense

e> ordered > past tense

Please share the OA once you have it
_________________

Best Regards,
Ashwini

Kudos if it was helpful :)

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 07 Jun 2015
Posts: 12
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2016, 02:32
D.) is the answer, because it correctly follows the if (past).....then(past) condition.

might(past tense) come about much more readily if governments were(past tense) to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Mar 2012
Posts: 336
Schools: Schulich '16
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2016, 03:27
grv805 wrote:
D.) is the answer, because it correctly follows the if (past).....then(past) condition.

might(past tense) come about much more readily if governments were(past tense) to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.



i think ur reasoning is wrong here(were is not past tense here. its a subjunctive mood)

eg.If i were a rich man, i'll buy 1000 cars.

still looking for exact reasoning.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Mar 2012
Posts: 336
Schools: Schulich '16
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2016, 03:32
EBITDA wrote:
It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbers of fish will increase, but in the case of fish such as salmon such a recovery can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

a) can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
b) would come about much more readily if governments order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow that spawning fish requires.
c) came about much more readily if governments would order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
d) might come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
e) would have come about much more readily if governments ordered the removal of the dams that limit the water flow that fish need in order to spawn.

Could you please explain why do you discard or choose each of the options?


i was stuck with A and D. but after reading couple of times Choice D > Choice A

in A, if government limit fishing,then numbers WILL increase(can or not), but in case of salmon (IT WILL, but after comma CLEARLY states that.)

So we need MIGHT(100 % it will happen because there is contrast in the sentence with but) not CAN (50-50%)

hope it helps
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 24 Apr 2014
Posts: 115
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V38
GMAT 2: 750 Q48 V45
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Reviews Badge
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2016, 04:52
1
Clearly answer is D .

Tense issue in most of the options.
A) can ( present ) .... if (hypothetical past)---- wrong
B) would .....if (present)
C)if....would (wrong usage)
D) might is correctly used with hypothetical past.
E) would have....if (past)


Sent from my Le X507 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
_________________

way to victory .....

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 24 Apr 2014
Posts: 115
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V38
GMAT 2: 750 Q48 V45
GPA: 4
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Reviews Badge
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2016, 04:54
Clearly answer is D .

Tense issue in most of the options.
A) can ( present ) .... if (hypothetical past)---- wrong
B) would .....if (present)
C)if....would (wrong usage)
D) might is correctly used with hypothetical past.
E) would have....if (past)


Sent from my Le X507 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
_________________

way to victory .....

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 May 2016
Posts: 164
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2016, 05:11
I appreciate all your responses. Nonetheless, I see a very low level of reasoning or knowledge of the language in them.

B) "order" is wrong ---> It should be "ordered".
C) "came" is wrong.
E) "would have come about" (past) & "ordered" (present) ---> It should be "would have come about" (past) & "had ordered" (past)

Between A and D, I went for D. I did not like the use of "can" in option A.

Could someone please give exact reasons for discarding A?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Feb 2016
Posts: 4
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jun 2016, 13:26
You can not use "can come" with "the governments were"..
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Apr 2016
Posts: 6
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Jul 2016, 19:29
EBITDA wrote:
It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbers of fish will increase, but in the case of fish such as salmon such a recovery can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

a) can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
b) would come about much more readily if governments order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow that spawning fish requires.
c) came about much more readily if governments would order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
d) might come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
e) would have come about much more readily if governments ordered the removal of the dams that limit the water flow that fish need in order to spawn.

Could you please explain why do you discard or choose each of the options?


For if clause, rules are:
1. If V1 (infnitive), will V1 (infinitive)
2. If V2 (pas tense), would V1 (infinitive)
3. If had V3 (past participle), would have V3
In this case we use rule number 2

Hope it helps
Senior SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1314
Location: Malaysia
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Oct 2017, 17:26
Quote:
It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbers of fish will increase, but in the case of fish such as salmon such a recovery can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(A) can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(B) would come about much more readily if governments order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow that spawning fish requires.

(C) came about much more readily if governments would order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(D) might come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(E) would have come about much more readily if governments ordered the removal of the dams that limit the water flow that fish need in order to spawn.


GMATNinja, Could you help with this question?
_________________

"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."

“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”

"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."

Rules for posting in verbal forum | Please DO NOT post short answer in your post!

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 14 Apr 2015
Posts: 18
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Oct 2017, 23:32
Hi mikemcgarry,

Can you please help me understand why option D is preferred to option A
Expert Post
4 KUDOS received
Verbal Expert
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3201
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Oct 2017, 05:02
4
1
mohitbahl wrote:
Hi mikemcgarry,

Can you please help me understand why option D is preferred to option A


"Can" is used to express ability, whereas "might" is used to express possibility. In this case the meaning intended is that there is a possibilty of recovery, not that the recovery is able to do something. Hence D is better than A.
Expert Post
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4668
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Oct 2017, 10:06
mohitbahl wrote:
Hi mikemcgarry,

Can you please help me understand why option D is preferred to option A

Dear mohitbahl,

I'm happy to respond. :-)

I see that my brilliant colleague sayantanc2k responded. I will add a few thoughts.

I am highly suspicious of this question. No source is listed and I could not find a source on the web. I don't think this is a high quality well-written question. I think the "can" vs. "would" split between (A) & (D) is specious. The verb "can" denotes possibility, and it certainly would be possible for the salmon to rebound if they knocked down the dams blocking the spawning routes. There is absolutely no problem with (A)--both (A) and (D) are acceptable answers. Sometimes authors who don't understand the GMAT SC well attempt to write "tricky" questions by creating a split based on something that is significant only in their imaginations.

There are many many very good math questions, because it's reasonably easy to create math questions that are GMAT-like. There are relatively few high quality verbal questions outside the official questions, because the standards for these questions is quite sophisticated and subtle. Most of the verbal questions from sources other than GMAC are of low quality.

Here's a high quality question:
With American cryptanalysts

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 65
Location: India
Schools: LBS '18, ISB '19
GMAT 1: 610 Q48 V26
GPA: 3.21
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Oct 2017, 02:40
EBITDA wrote:
It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbers of fish will increase, but in the case of fish such as salmon such a recovery can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(A) can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(B) would come about much more readily if governments order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow that spawning fish requires.

(C) came about much more readily if governments would order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(D) might come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.

(E) would have come about much more readily if governments ordered the removal of the dams that limit the water flow that fish need in order to spawn.


I kind of like this question. if you put your thoughts clearly , this question is a full demonstration
of conditional cases and subjunctive mood

Coming to the explanation
I will try to solve it by doing POE
OPTION A
can come about much more readily if governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.
if then contruction mentioning a subjunctive mood , however written in opposite manner (( then if form ))
Let me write it in If then form
IF governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish THEN such a recovery can come about much more readily
Now, here is a problem "" If were , Then can"" . we can't take a present tense in the ""then construction"" here ,,if it was could things could have worked. ((((If i were,,,,, then you would construction)))
This is why A is wrong.

Lets looks at option B
IF governments ORDER the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow that spawning fish requires. THEN such a recovery WOULD HAVE come about much more readily
the error is clearly visible """IF PRESENT ((( ORDER )) TENSE , THEN (((WOULD HAVE )) A CONDITIONAL TENSE
is wrong. conditionals are used with past or past perfect tenses in if then constructions.

Now i will talk abour option E here . If we write it in above if then form the tenses we get areIF ORDERED (( PAST TENSE )) , THEN WOULD HAVE BEEN (( CONDITIONAL PERFECT))
the error is clearly visible here again the conditional perfect is used with past perfect in if then constructions.

Option c can also be ruled out accordingly
If WOULD ORDER,, THEN CAME this is totally nonsensical.

Coming to option d
IF governments were to order the removal of the dams that limit the water-flow required by spawning fish.such a recovery MIGHT come about much more readily

Might is the past tense of may , and can be substituted for would here
therefore we get IF WERE TO ORDER (( HYPOTHETICAL IN IF,,, IN PAST TENSE)), THEN ,,, MIGHT (( substitution for would (( if i were ,,, you would form )) Past tense ))
is correct
kudos are appreciated :)
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Mar 2017
Posts: 25
Concentration: Marketing, Operations
GMAT 1: 620 Q48 V28
GMAT 2: 660 Q44 V36
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Oct 2017, 08:22
I'll tell you what I used to eliminate between A and D.

Can I go to the loo? or May I go to the loo?
All those memes come handy sometimes... lol..

It aint stupid if it works is it...
Re: It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe   [#permalink] 23 Oct 2017, 08:22
Display posts from previous: Sort by

It has often been assumed that if governments limit fishing, the numbe

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.