Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 12:42 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 12:42
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
User avatar
nkim
Joined: 02 Jun 2023
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 3
Own Kudos:
36
 [36]
Location: Canada
Posts: 3
Kudos: 36
 [36]
5
Kudos
Add Kudos
31
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
nkim
Joined: 02 Jun 2023
Last visit: 30 Sep 2025
Posts: 3
Own Kudos:
Location: Canada
Posts: 3
Kudos: 36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Aarushi225
Joined: 15 Jun 2024
Last visit: 27 Feb 2025
Posts: 47
Own Kudos:
44
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, General Management
GPA: 10
Posts: 47
Kudos: 44
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Purnank
Joined: 05 Jan 2024
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 680
Own Kudos:
585
 [1]
Given Kudos: 166
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q88 V76 DI80
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q88 V76 DI80
Posts: 680
Kudos: 585
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
­
Matheus - C - stating about density of waterfowl more inside than outside. acting as strengthen one for matheus.
Ramizah - E - attacking one site of waterfowl species wont going to affect that much if there are multiple numbers of sites are present - acting as strengthen one for ramizah.
User avatar
SergejK
Joined: 22 Mar 2024
Last visit: 02 May 2025
Posts: 162
Own Kudos:
780
 [4]
Given Kudos: 74
Posts: 162
Kudos: 780
 [4]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This question is easy to solve once we find the assumptions with each argument. The way we can help ourselves with such type of questions where there is a counter-argument is by understanding what the counter-argument attacks and this is in most cases based on the first assumption.

In our case, Matheus' conclusion is that the land should become a nature preserve, based on the fact that it is a major nesting area for migratory waterfowl some of which are endangered. If we don't find the assumption right away (either that the industrial project can be started somewhere else OR that the birds cannot nest somewhere else), we can look at what Ramizah is countering and what he is attacking. Ramizah conclusion is unstated, which maybe makes it hard to find the underlying assumption. What he is trying to say is that the city council needs to build there as this is one of the most promising ways to create jobs. After stating his counter-point, Ramizah presents an alternative nesting place, and by providing this alternative, he is attacking one of Matheus' assumptions, namely that the birds cannot nest somewhere else. What is Ramizah assuming? His assumption is that there is no difference in the quality of the nesting places and that the birds will migrate there.

Looking at the answer choices, we see that C provides support for Matheus' assumption that waterfront within the city is the perfect location, as the largest endangered waterfowl population resides there. And E is perfectly complements Ramizah's assumption that there is no difference in the quality of the nesting places as losing the intercity waterfront nesting area is unlikely to reduce the waterfowl population.
User avatar
miag
Joined: 10 Dec 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 189
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 143
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Sustainability
GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q87 V83 DI80
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q87 V83 DI80
Posts: 189
Kudos: 73
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
why can D) not be the answer for Ramizah? Bunuel chetan2u Bismuth83 would appreciate your expert opinion here!
User avatar
chetan2u
User avatar
GMAT Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 11,238
Own Kudos:
43,705
 [1]
Given Kudos: 335
Status:Math and DI Expert
Location: India
Concentration: Human Resources, General Management
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V89 DI81
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V89 DI81
Posts: 11,238
Kudos: 43,705
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
miag
why can D) not be the answer for Ramizah? Bunuel chetan2u Bismuth83 would appreciate your expert opinion here!

Matheus himself says that this stretch is the last undeveloped stretch in the city limits. So D says nothing new.
User avatar
manavsaraf001
Joined: 13 Jul 2022
Last visit: 14 Sep 2025
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
7
 [1]
Given Kudos: 240
Posts: 15
Kudos: 7
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For Matheus , why option A - " city council wants to protect migratory waterfowl " - is incorrect.
SergejK
This question is easy to solve once we find the assumptions with each argument. The way we can help ourselves with such type of questions where there is a counter-argument is by understanding what the counter-argument attacks and this is in most cases based on the first assumption.

In our case, Matheus' conclusion is that the land should become a nature preserve, based on the fact that it is a major nesting area for migratory waterfowl some of which are endangered. If we don't find the assumption right away (either that the industrial project can be started somewhere else OR that the birds cannot nest somewhere else), we can look at what Ramizah is countering and what he is attacking. Ramizah conclusion is unstated, which maybe makes it hard to find the underlying assumption. What he is trying to say is that the city council needs to build there as this is one of the most promising ways to create jobs. After stating his counter-point, Ramizah presents an alternative nesting place, and by providing this alternative, he is attacking one of Matheus' assumptions, namely that the birds cannot nest somewhere else. What is Ramizah assuming? His assumption is that there is no difference in the quality of the nesting places and that the birds will migrate there.

Looking at the answer choices, we see that C provides support for Matheus' assumption that waterfront within the city is the perfect location, as the largest endangered waterfowl population resides there. And E is perfectly complements Ramizah's assumption that there is no difference in the quality of the nesting places as losing the intercity waterfront nesting area is unlikely to reduce the waterfowl population.
User avatar
ravjaz
Joined: 18 Mar 2025
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 15
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 46
Posts: 15
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bumping this up, why not A? I'm struggling to understand how I should be thinking of questions such as this since from my perspective, C is somewhat restating what M said whilst A adds to it making it a stronger?
manavsaraf001
For Matheus , why option A - " city council wants to protect migratory waterfowl " - is incorrect.
SergejK
This question is easy to solve once we find the assumptions with each argument. The way we can help ourselves with such type of questions where there is a counter-argument is by understanding what the counter-argument attacks and this is in most cases based on the first assumption.

In our case, Matheus' conclusion is that the land should become a nature preserve, based on the fact that it is a major nesting area for migratory waterfowl some of which are endangered. If we don't find the assumption right away (either that the industrial project can be started somewhere else OR that the birds cannot nest somewhere else), we can look at what Ramizah is countering and what he is attacking. Ramizah conclusion is unstated, which maybe makes it hard to find the underlying assumption. What he is trying to say is that the city council needs to build there as this is one of the most promising ways to create jobs. After stating his counter-point, Ramizah presents an alternative nesting place, and by providing this alternative, he is attacking one of Matheus' assumptions, namely that the birds cannot nest somewhere else. What is Ramizah assuming? His assumption is that there is no difference in the quality of the nesting places and that the birds will migrate there.

Looking at the answer choices, we see that C provides support for Matheus' assumption that waterfront within the city is the perfect location, as the largest endangered waterfowl population resides there. And E is perfectly complements Ramizah's assumption that there is no difference in the quality of the nesting places as losing the intercity waterfront nesting area is unlikely to reduce the waterfowl population.
User avatar
cheshire
User avatar
DI Forum Moderator
Joined: 26 Jun 2025
Last visit: 18 Sep 2025
Posts: 270
Own Kudos:
256
 [1]
Given Kudos: 34
Posts: 270
Kudos: 256
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Matheus's Core Argument:
Quote:
"This land should become a nature preserve because it’s a major nesting area for migratory waterfowl, including endangered species."
So his claim is:
  • The land is ecologically important and should be protected.


Option A:
Quote:
"The city council wants to protect migratory waterfowl."
This sounds supportive in tone, but it doesn't do what we need:
  • It tells us what the council wants, not why this specific land matters.
  • Even if the council wants to protect migratory birds, it might think other areas would be better for that — it doesn’t prove that this undeveloped waterfront is especially important.
Option A supports a general value, but it doesn’t give a reason to preserve this specific land.


Option C:
Quote:
"Of the endangered waterfowl that nest in or near the city, the largest nesting population is found in the undeveloped waterfront within the city limits."
Now this directly strengthens Matheus's argument because:
  • It shows this specific area is uniquely valuable to endangered waterfowl.
  • That means preserving this site has real conservation impact, not just symbolic value.
Option C makes Matheus’s argument evidence-based and location-specific.

ravjaz
Bumping this up, why not A? I'm struggling to understand how I should be thinking of questions such as this since from my perspective, C is somewhat restating what M said whilst A adds to it making it a stronger?
manavsaraf001
For Matheus , why option A - " city council wants to protect migratory waterfowl " - is incorrect.
SergejK
This question is easy to solve once we find the assumptions with each argument. The way we can help ourselves with such type of questions where there is a counter-argument is by understanding what the counter-argument attacks and this is in most cases based on the first assumption.

In our case, Matheus' conclusion is that the land should become a nature preserve, based on the fact that it is a major nesting area for migratory waterfowl some of which are endangered. If we don't find the assumption right away (either that the industrial project can be started somewhere else OR that the birds cannot nest somewhere else), we can look at what Ramizah is countering and what he is attacking. Ramizah conclusion is unstated, which maybe makes it hard to find the underlying assumption. What he is trying to say is that the city council needs to build there as this is one of the most promising ways to create jobs. After stating his counter-point, Ramizah presents an alternative nesting place, and by providing this alternative, he is attacking one of Matheus' assumptions, namely that the birds cannot nest somewhere else. What is Ramizah assuming? His assumption is that there is no difference in the quality of the nesting places and that the birds will migrate there.

Looking at the answer choices, we see that C provides support for Matheus' assumption that waterfront within the city is the perfect location, as the largest endangered waterfowl population resides there. And E is perfectly complements Ramizah's assumption that there is no difference in the quality of the nesting places as losing the intercity waterfront nesting area is unlikely to reduce the waterfowl population.
Moderators:
Math Expert
105390 posts
496 posts