Ecologist: The incidence of alligator attacks on humans in the vicinit

Question

Ecologist: The incidence of alligator attacks on humans in the vicinity of the Blue Lagoon has increased in recent years. Relocating at least half of the Blue Lagoon`s alligator population would help decrease the incidence of alligator attacks on humans.

The ecologist`s claim relies on which of the following assumptions?

A. Alligators prefer humans to other food sources.

B. There is a correlation between the size of the alligator population and the incidence of alligator attacks on humans.

C. In recent years, there has been no significant change in the size of the alligator population in the Blue Lagoon.

D. Not all alligator attacks on humans are reported to authorities.

E. Relocating half of the lagoon`s alligator population would not be prohibitively expensive.

abhinav770 · Accepted Answer

Premise Increased Alligator attacks on humans in recent years. Conclusion Decreasing number of Alligators would help decrease the incidence of alligator attacks on humans. Assumption Less number of Alligators => Fewer incidences of Alligator attacks. Correct answer: Option (B) Scrolling down without Kudos ?

sudarshan22 · Answer

Conclusion  :  
Less the size of alligator in the vicinity, less the incidence of alligator attacks on humans

B. There is a correlation between the size of the alligator population and the incidence of alligator attacks on humans. -->   Correct,    negate the statement and see how the conclusion fall apart

Hence,   B  .

Skywalker18 · Answer

Ecologist: The incidence of alligator attacks on humans in the vicinity of the Blue Lagoon has increased in recent years. Relocating at least half of the Blue Lagoon`s alligator population would help decrease the incidence of alligator attacks on humans.

Type- Assumptions
Boil it down - Relocating at least half of the Blue Lagoon`s alligator population would help decrease the incidence of alligator attacks on humans.

A. Alligators prefer humans to other food sources. - Incorrect - Alligators might just attack and not eat humans

B. There is a correlation between the size of the alligator population and the incidence of alligator attacks on humans. - Correct - On negating this the argument falls apart

C. In recent years, there has been no significant change in the size of the alligator population in the Blue Lagoon. - Incorrect

D. Not all alligator attacks on humans are reported to authorities. - Incorrect - it only tells that ACTUAL numbers are higher

E. Relocating half of the lagoon`s alligator population would not be prohibitively expensive. - Irrelevant

Answer B

jaisonsunny77 · Answer

The objective: decrease the incidence of alligator attacks on humans.
How? : By relocating at least  half of  the Blue Lagoon`s   alligator population

For the plan (relocating half of the alligator population) to actually result in a decrease in the incidence of alligator attacks on humans, there must be some sort of correlation between alligator population and incidents of attacks.  If there was no correlation between the two, then executing the plan will never change the incidence of attacks.

Hence, the right answer would have to highlight this assumption (as shown in the  highlighted text )

So, let us examine the available answer choices:

A.  Alligators prefer humans to other food sources.  - How does this statement help to achieve a decrease in the incidents of attacks on humans? It does not. Hence,  eliminate (A).

B.  There is a correlation between the size of the alligator population and the incidence of alligator attacks on humans.  - BINGO. This fact establishes a direct link between the alligator population size and incidence of attacks. So, by relocation at least half of the alligator population, we can certainly expect a decrease in the incidence of alligator attacks on humans. Hence,   (B) is the right answer.  
 
C.  In recent years, there has been no significant change in the size of the alligator population in the Blue Lagoon.  -Okay. But how exactly does this statement relate to the outcome of the relocation plan? It doesn't! Hence,  eliminate (C).

D.  Not all alligator attacks on humans are reported to authorities.  - this statement reiterates the threat of alligators, but it does not establish a direct link between the alligator population size and the incidence of alligator attacks. Hence,  eliminate (D).

E.  Relocating half of the lagoon`s alligator population would not be prohibitively expensive.   - the expense of this plan is not related to its outcome in any way. hence,  eliminate (E)

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

Ecologist: The incidence of alligator attacks on humans in the vicinit

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Ecologist: The incidence of alligator attacks on humans in the vicinit

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards