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

 It is currently 23 Oct 2018, 00:55

### 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

# The number of stray dogs picked up in Ford City last year by

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 05 Oct 2008
Posts: 249
The number of stray dogs picked up in Ford City last year by  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2009, 04:06
1
9
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

50% (01:50) correct 50% (01:46) wrong based on 777 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The number of stray dogs picked up in Ford City last year by the city's dog catchers was fifty percent lower than the previous year's figure. The Mayor of Ford City attributed this decline to the city's recent crackdown on unlicensed breeders that breed dogs dangerously fast and release any unwanted puppies on the streets. Over a dozen operators of these so called "puppy farms" have been incarcerated over the last year in Ford City.

Each of the following, if true, could weaken the Mayor's conclusion that the decline in the number of stray dogs picked up by the city's dog catchers is due to the crackdown on "puppy farms" EXCEPT:

A. Agange City, located right next to Ford City, also experienced a fifty percent decline in the number of stray dogs caught on its streets by its dog catchers, but did not engage in a crackdown on puppy farms in that city.

B. Ford City cut the budget for dog catching one year ago, forcing the firing of over half of the Dog Catching Department's staff.

C.The past winter was bitterly cold in Ford City, causing many unprotected stray animals to perish.

D. One year ago, a privately funded organization began rounding up stray dogs in Ford City and putting them up for adoption on the internet.

E. Ford City already had tough laws to punish operators of "puppy farms" long before the most recent year.
Intern
Joined: 11 Aug 2012
Posts: 12
Location: United States
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT Date: 10-12-2012
GPA: 3.7
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
The number of stray dogs picked up in Ford City last year by  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2012, 10:39
2
7
The number of stray dogs picked up in Ford City last year by the city's dog catchers was fifty percent lower than the previous year's figure. The Mayor of Ford City attributed this decline to the city's recent crackdown on unlicensed breeders that breed dogs dangerously fast and release any unwanted puppies on the streets. Over a dozen operators of these so called "puppy farms" have been incarcerated over the last year in Ford City.

Each of the following, if true, could weaken the Mayor's conclusion that the decline in the number of stray dogs picked up by the city's dog catchers is due to the crackdown on "puppy farms" EXCEPT:
a. Agange City, located right next to Ford City, also experienced a fifty percent decline in the number of stray dogs caught on its streets by its dog catchers, but did not engage in a crackdown on puppy farms in that city.
b. Ford City cut the budget for dog catching one year ago, forcing the firing of over half of the Dog Catching Department's staff.
c. The past winter was bitterly cold in Ford City, causing many unprotected stray animals to perish.
d. One year ago, a privately funded organization began rounding up stray dogs in Ford City and putting them up for adoption on the internet.
e. Ford City already had tough laws to punish operators of "puppy farms" long before the most recent year.
##### General Discussion
Intern
Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Posts: 22

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2009, 08:12
1
IMO (A) .. wat is the OA ?
Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 365
Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2009, 20:30
I think Economist is right, E strengthens the argument.
_________________

Never give up,,,

Manager
Joined: 07 Apr 2009
Posts: 104

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2009, 23:15
1
Now the issue is: which answer strengthens Mayor's conclusion that the decline in the number of stray dogs picked up by the city's dog catchers is due to the crackdown on "puppy farms"

A. Agange City, located right next to Ford City, also experienced a fifty percent decline in the number of stray dogs caught on its streets by its dog catchers, but did not engage in a crackdown on puppy farms in that city.
Other city reduced without crackdown on puppy farms, does it strengthens ..NO

B. Ford City cut the budget for dog catching one year ago, forcing the firing of over half of the Dog Catching Department's staff.

Now here i am confused, If the no. of men in dog catching squad was reduced then how the no. of puppies has reduced, It must be because there was a crack down on puppy farmers
will have to check

C.The past winter was bitterly cold in Ford City, causing many unprotected stray animals to perish.
Weakens.. not because of crackdown

D. One year ago, a privately funded organization began rounding up stray dogs in Ford City and putting them up for adoption on the internet.
weakens.. again suggests the other cause of reduction in no.

E. Ford City already had tough laws to punish operators of "puppy farms" long before the most recent year.

Already had tough laws to punish, not convincing but only one in +ve

so confused b/w B & E
Manager
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 108
Location: Ukraine, Kyiv

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2009, 00:19
I bet this is E.

I was also confused between B and E, but B weakens the argument by claiming that the staff reduction (not the imprisonment of illegal breeders) was the reason for the decline of stray dog catches.
_________________

Never, never, never give up

Manager
Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Posts: 119

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2009, 00:57
study wrote:
The number of stray dogs picked up in Ford City last year by the city's dog catchers was fifty percent lower than the previous year's figure. The Mayor of Ford City attributed this decline to the city's recent crackdown on unlicensed breeders that breed dogs dangerously fast and release any unwanted puppies on the streets. Over a dozen operators of these so called "puppy farms" have been incarcerated over the last year in Ford City.

Each of the following, if true, could weaken the Mayor's conclusion that the decline in the number of stray dogs picked up by the city's dog catchers is due to the crackdown on "puppy farms" EXCEPT:

A. Agange City, located right next to Ford City, also experienced a fifty percent decline in the number of stray dogs caught on its streets by its dog catchers, but did not engage in a crackdown on puppy farms in that city.

B. Ford City cut the budget for dog catching one year ago, forcing the firing of over half of the Dog Catching Department's staff.

C.The past winter was bitterly cold in Ford City, causing many unprotected stray animals to perish.

D. One year ago, a privately funded organization began rounding up stray dogs in Ford City and putting them up for adoption on the internet.

E. Ford City already had tough laws to punish operators of "puppy farms" long before the most recent year.

I would go with B.

E states that City already had tough laws to punish puppy farms, so it's reasonable to infer that any extra crackdown will not change the situation significantely. Hence, it's weakens the argument - dicline is NOT due to crackdown.
But B looks a bit out of scope - for sure it doesn't weaken the argument. B states that catchers are halved recentely. Hence we should expact increase in stray dogs rather than decline. So, it should be another cause, which led to decline. And it could be due to crackdown. B does NOT weaken. My answer is B.
Intern
Joined: 30 Sep 2009
Posts: 38

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2009, 02:03
Shud be E.
I see it this way.
The city has had tough laws already in place. But that does not mean they actually punished the operators.
May be only in this year they actually started the crackdown. SO this answer actually doesnt affect the stimuli

B,C and D clearly weaken the argument.

A is not related, since happenings in one city need not affect the other city directly.
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Location: Russian Federation
GMAT 3: 740 Q40 V50
GMAT 4: 700 Q48 V38
GMAT 5: 710 Q45 V41
GMAT 6: 680 Q47 V36
GMAT 9: 740 Q49 V42
GMAT 11: 500 Q47 V33
GMAT 14: 760 Q49 V44
WE: Supply Chain Management (Energy and Utilities)

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2009, 08:33

Here the question is "Each of the following, if true, could weaken the Mayor's conclusion that the decline in the number of stray dogs picked up by the city's dog catchers is due to the crackdown on "puppy farms" EXCEPT. It doesn,t mean that question asked is strengthen question.
Manager
Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Posts: 119

### Show Tags

20 Oct 2009, 23:07
Can somebody explain where I'm wrong with B.

B states the number of catchers have halved recentely --> the number of stray dogs should increase. But we observe decline in stray dogs --> another reason should exist, for example, crackdown. Hence, B doesn't weaken.
Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 365
Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2009, 18:34
The Mayor of Ford City claims that recent crackdown on unlicensed breeders that breed dogs dangerously fast and release any unwanted puppies on the streets was the reason they are catching fewer puppies.
The arguments that weaken the claim all will provide other reasons why fewer puppies were caught.
The answer B, you are choosing also is weakening the argument by stating that the reason they caught fewer puppies because Ford City cut the budget for dog catching one year ago, forcing the firing of over half of the Dog Catching Department's staff, thus having fewer people to catch puppies. That means fewer puppies were caught by fewer people, but not because of the measures of the Mayor.
Thus this answer is not OA.
Give me, kudos if you like my explanation
_________________

Never give up,,,

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Jul 2009
Posts: 270

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2009, 22:16
1
IMO still for A as A clearly not weaken the argument... Want to know the source of the question and official explanation if available
Retired Moderator
Joined: 02 Oct 2009
Posts: 467
GMAT 1: 530 Q47 V17
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V36

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2009, 23:43
Yeah its E
though the stimulus was easy The Question asked was bit confusing
Intern
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 34

### Show Tags

12 Nov 2009, 06:29
well where you went wrong is, only the no. of stray dogs caught went down by 50% not the no. of stray dogs itself..

bsv180985 wrote:
Can somebody explain where I'm wrong with B.

B states the number of catchers have halved recentely --> the number of stray dogs should increase. But we observe decline in stray dogs --> another reason should exist, for example, crackdown. Hence, B doesn't weaken.
Intern
Joined: 28 Apr 2009
Posts: 34

### Show Tags

12 Nov 2009, 06:33
I would agree with you. To me as well A seems to be the right option.

E clearly weakens the argument. The conclusion is, last year's cracking down of the people responsible of stray dogs was the reason for the reduction in the no. of stray dogs caught.

But if there had been strict rules already, then probably the no. of stray dogs were already in decreasing mode, say last year was only about 50% of the year before and this year it is only 50% of what as last year etc..

So E clearly weakens the argument.

I still think A is the answer because it does nothing to weaken the argument.

angel2009 wrote:
IMO still for A as A clearly not weaken the argument... Want to know the source of the question and official explanation if available
SVP
Affiliations: HEC
Joined: 28 Sep 2009
Posts: 1596
Concentration: Economics, Finance
GMAT 1: 730 Q48 V44

### Show Tags

12 Nov 2009, 17:13
E seems like the right choice here. Remember, the opposite of weaken gives us two options: (1) strengthen and (2) neutral. In other words, the logical opposite of weaken is "not weaken." Strengthen is the polar opposite of weaken, but between these two extremes is a neutral category. Option E, I think, niether strengthens nor weakens the argument; it's neutral, which qualifies it as an opposite of weaken.

Choice A is tempting, but the cities are right next to eachother. The two cities will most likely share some characteristics. Agange City's experience with dog reductions should cast some doubt on the mayor's assertions.
_________________
Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1436
Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology

### Show Tags

22 Mar 2011, 07:43
E is correct because tough laws had been enacted, but it's not quite known if they were enforced as well.
_________________

Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Intern
Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Posts: 8

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2011, 00:55
It's E!
B is wrong because if the dog-catchers' were halved, then only what they caught is stated and not the statistical number of stray dogs on the street- there is a fine difference between the 2. Let us look the argument from from another perspective-the premise does not state the number of stray dogs on the city streets were halved but the number caught by dog-catchers! So if you reduce the personnel (dog-catchers) by 50% you have 50% less hands to do the job and the work done would decrease accordingly!
Manager
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 89
Re: The number of stray dogs picked up in Ford City last year by  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Mar 2012, 13:11
Hi,

for this question I think the answer should be "A" because it is irrelevant.

E cannot be the answer because it says

E. Ford City already had tough laws to punish operators of "puppy farms" long before the most recent year.

The argument says that crackdown was recent but the law was already there to punish them, so the crackdown is nothing special on breeders and hence this weakens the conclusion that crackdown was responsible.

"The Mayor of Ford City attributed this decline to the city's recent crackdown on unlicensed breeders that breed dogs dangerously fast and release any unwanted puppies on the streets"

Thanks
Intern
Joined: 03 Feb 2012
Posts: 8
Re: The number of stray dogs picked up in Ford City last year by  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Mar 2012, 18:40
raviram80 wrote:
Hi,

for this question I think the answer should be "A" because it is irrelevant.

E cannot be the answer because it says

E. Ford City already had tough laws to punish operators of "puppy farms" long before the most recent year.

The argument says that crackdown was recent but the law was already there to punish them, so the crackdown is nothing special on breeders and hence this weakens the conclusion that crackdown was responsible.

"The Mayor of Ford City attributed this decline to the city's recent crackdown on unlicensed breeders that breed dogs dangerously fast and release any unwanted puppies on the streets"

Thanks

"A" weakens the argument because it's saying that Agange City (a city right beside Ford city) experienced the same decline even though they didn't crack down on puppy farms in their city. So it's likely that an outside factor, and not the cracking down of puppy farms, that is causing the decline.

"E" does not weaken the argument because it's simply saying that the laws to punish puppy farms existed before the recent years. It does not say how strongly these laws were actually being enforced in the past.
Re: The number of stray dogs picked up in Ford City last year by &nbs [#permalink] 08 Mar 2012, 18:40

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 43 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by