It is currently 20 Nov 2017, 14:40

### 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

# Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical

Author Message
Director
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 867

Kudos [?]: 271 [0], given: 7

Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School
Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2007, 10:56
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical fertilizers and pesticide in farming is harmful to local wildlife. To produce the same amount of food, however, more land must be under cultivation when organic farming techniques are used than when chemicals are used. Therefore, organic farming leaves less land available as habitat for local wildlife.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the author’s argument depends?

(A) Chemical fertilizers and pesticides pose no health threat to wildlife.
(B) Wildlife living near farms where chemicals are used will not ingest any food or water containing those chemicals.
(C) The only disadvantage to using chemicals in farming is their potential effect on wildlife.
(D) The same crops are grown on organic farms as on farms where chemicals are used.
(E) Land cultivated by organic farming methods no longer constitutes a habitat for wildlife.

Kudos [?]: 271 [0], given: 7

Director
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 909

Kudos [?]: 292 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2007, 12:56
Fistail wrote:
Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical fertilizers and pesticide in farming is harmful to local wildlife. To produce the same amount of food, however, more land must be under cultivation when organic farming techniques are used than when chemicals are used. Therefore, organic farming leaves less land available as habitat for local wildlife.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the author’s argument depends?

(A) Chemical fertilizers and pesticides pose no health threat to wildlife.
(B) Wildlife living near farms where chemicals are used will not ingest any food or water containing those chemicals.
(C) The only disadvantage to using chemicals in farming is their potential effect on wildlife.
(D) The same crops are grown on organic farms as on farms where chemicals are used.
(E) Land cultivated by organic farming methods no longer constitutes a habitat for wildlife.

The author is saying that by not using pesticides, organic farming is meant to protect wildlife but still essentially taking away a bigger chunk of their home by using more land.
I would say the answer is E although I was tempted by C.

Kudos [?]: 292 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 851

Kudos [?]: 143 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2007, 19:40
Straight E...The conclusion is about organic farming leaving less land free...so E is irrelevant.

Kudos [?]: 143 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 867

Kudos [?]: 271 [0], given: 7

Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School

### Show Tags

05 Aug 2007, 18:40
Fistail wrote:
Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical fertilizers and pesticide in farming is harmful to local wildlife. To produce the same amount of food, however, more land must be under cultivation when organic farming techniques are used than when chemicals are used. Therefore, organic farming leaves less land available as habitat for local wildlife.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the author’s argument depends?

(A) Chemical fertilizers and pesticides pose no health threat to wildlife.
(B) Wildlife living near farms where chemicals are used will not ingest any food or water containing those chemicals.
(C) The only disadvantage to using chemicals in farming is their potential effect on wildlife.
(D) The same crops are grown on organic farms as on farms where chemicals are used.
(E) Land cultivated by organic farming methods no longer constitutes a habitat for wildlife.

OA is E.

Kudos [?]: 271 [0], given: 7

Re: CR; Crops   [#permalink] 05 Aug 2007, 18:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Proponents of organic farming claim that using chemical

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 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®.