Every year a large percentage of the population of loggerhead and leat

Question

Every year a large percentage of the population of loggerhead and leatherback turtles are killed by deep-sea fishing. To protect land animals, habitats of endangered species are fenced off and monitored. This method of protection cannot be implemented in ocean habitats that change position in three dimensions.

If the statements above are correct, they most strongly support which of the following?

If the statements above are correct, they most strongly support which of the following?

(A) A method for the protection of moving habitats would have to be developed and implemented to solve the problem of endangered turtles.

(B) Conservationists are not working hard enough to develop a protection method for every kind of habitat.

(C) In a matter of a few years, loggerhead an leatherback turtles will no longer inhabit the oceans.

(D) Other sea animals are also harmed by the fishing industry, and will also become endangered unless the problem is solved.

(E) To control and monitor a three-dimensional ocean habitat, an infrared tagging system should be used.

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Every year a large percentage of the population of loggerhead and leatherback turtles are killed by deep-sea fishing. To protect land animals, habitats of endangered species are fenced off and monitored. This method of protection cannot be implemented in ocean habitats that change position in three dimensions.

If the statements above are correct, they most strongly support which of the following?

If the statements above are correct, they most strongly support which of the following?

(A) A method for the protection of moving habitats would have to be developed and implemented to solve the problem of endangered turtles.

This answer choice correctly concludes that in order to save the turtles, a specific method of protecting ocean habitats would have to be developed (because the land methods are ineffective in the sea).

(B) Conservationists are not working hard enough to develop a protection method for every kind of habitat.

Incorrect.

This is an Inference question, so the argument is comprised of premises only, on which basis you are asked to draw a conclusion:

Premise A: Deep-sea fishing kills many loggerhead an leatherback turtles every year.
 +
Premise B: When land animals become endangered, their habitats are closed off with fences so that they can be protected.
 +
Premise C: Fences cannot be used for ocean animals since they swim freely in different directions and areas of the ocean.
 =
Conclusion: ?

This conclusion makes too great a leap from the premises given. We cannot just assume that conservationists are not working hard enough.

(C) In a matter of a few years, loggerhead an leatherback turtles will no longer inhabit the oceans.

Incorrect.

This conclusion makes too great a leap from the premises given. Although the argument does not provide a solution to the problem, we cannot assume that it will never be solved.

Furthermore, nothing in the premises allows us to conclude that the rate of extinction is so quick as to eradicate the population of these species so quickly. Other assumptions would be needed for this conclusion to be true (i.e. that the species were also not reproducing quickly enough, for example).

(D) Other sea animals are also harmed by the fishing industry, and will also become endangered unless the problem is solved.

Incorrect.

The argument does not mention anything about other sea animals. This answer choice presents new information that resembles an additional premise. Unfortunately, you should be looking for a conclusion based upon the current premises.

(E) To control and monitor a three-dimensional ocean habitat, an infrared tagging system should be used.

Incorrect.

This conclusion makes too great a leap from the premises given. Although it may be a legitimate suggestion, it is not supported by the argument.

kantapong · Answer

Prompt: Infer
Method of fencing land animals cannot be implemented in ocean where animals change direction in 3D.
A: keep
B: conservationists are not working hard (cannot be inferred)
C: turtles will not inhabit in ocean (cannot be inferred)
D: other sea animals (cannot be inferred)
E: infrared tagging system should be used (other methods do not imply infrared tagging: cannot be inferred)

By PoE, I answer A.

mSKR · Answer

Conclusion: This method of protection cannot be implemented in ocean habitats that change position in three dimensions.

What can make strengthen that method of protection can not be implemented?

A: ok so in future it can be implemented, right? Doesn’t strengthen the conclusion
B: ok so if they work hard, it can be developed. Hence doesn’t strengthen the conclusion
C: if they don’t habitat there, then this method of protection is not valid again. It directly strengthens the conclusion.
D: Irrelevant: it doesn’t talk about method 
E: Ok , so it directly weakens the conclusion.

Only C can make sense. Hence C is the correct answer.

mohammadfaraaz123 · Answer

A) A method for the protection of moving habitats would have to be developed and implemented to solve the problem of endangered turtles.

Since, method of protection cannot be implemented in ocean habitats that change position in three dimensions. Coming up with a method supports the statement above.    Keep

(B) Conservationists are not working hard enough to develop a protection method for every kind of habitat.

Irrelevant. Eliminate

(C) In a matter of a few years, loggerhead an leatherback turtles will no longer inhabit the oceans.

This is the problem which needs to be solved. Answer choice goes against the statement above.  Eliminate

(D) Other sea animals are also harmed by the fishing industry, and will also become endangered unless the problem is solved.

We are not concerned with anyone else but loggerhead and leatherback turtles  Eliminate

(E) To control and monitor a three-dimensional ocean habitat, an infrared tagging system should be used.

Irrelevant.   ELiminate

Answer option A looks good and should be correct imo.

mSKR · Answer

(C) In a matter of a few years, loggerhead an leatherback turtles will no longer inhabit the oceans.

I think it doesnt mean NOT EXIST/DIE OUT. They may just not inhabit there.

GyanaDash · Answer

Hi,

My analysis is as follows:
 
Suggestions are welcome. Thank you.

sumitkrocks · Answer

(A) A method for the protection of moving habitats would have to be developed and implemented to solve the problem of endangered turtles.

This Option should be rephrased to present it as one of the likely working solution rather than the only solution; There can be many other solution to the problem being discussed.
Not a very great construction, but this could be the answer.

(B)  Conservationists are not working hard enough to develop a protection method for every kind of habitat. 
Out of scope

(C)  In a matter of a few years, loggerhead an leatherback turtles will no longer inhabit the oceans. 
We can't predict anything based on the given information

(D)  Other sea animals are also harmed by the fishing industry, and will also become endangered unless the problem is solved. 
Can't draw this inference based on the given information

(E)  To control and monitor a three-dimensional ocean habitat, an infrared tagging system should be used. 
Can't draw this inference based on the given information

asishron29181 · Answer

Every year a large percentage of the population of loggerhead and leatherback turtles are killed by deep-sea fishing. To protect land animals, habitats of endangered species are fenced off and monitored. This method of protection cannot be implemented in ocean habitats that change position in three dimensions.

If the statements above are correct, they most strongly support which of the following?

A inference based question in which we cannot bring outside information.

(A) A method for the protection of moving habitats would have to be developed and implemented to solve the problem of endangered turtles.  - Correct. Surely this can be inferred from the final line of the passage.

(B) Conservationists are not working hard enough to develop a protection method for every kind of habitat. - Incorrect. Not mentioned anywhere in the passage.

(C) In a matter of a few years, loggerhead an leatherback turtles will no longer inhabit the oceans. - Too extreme/ outside opinion. Incorrect

(D) Other sea animals are also harmed by the fishing industry, and will also become endangered unless the problem is solved. - Incorrect. Other sea animals are not mentioned in the passage.

(E) To control and monitor a three-dimensional ocean habitat, an infrared tagging system should be used. - Incorrect. No such infrared tagging system is discussed in the passage. Outside information

IMO A

gasoline · Answer

A is a clear winner.

Option C states an extreme statement. 
Moreover, what if both the loggerhead an leatherback turtles reproduce at a faster rate than the killing rate.
Option C is not airtight.

jrk23 · Answer

Confused between "A" and "E".... i think as we are talking about turtles so "A".

Also, if there is already a system than why we are not using that...so "E"can be eliminated. No sure but.

HarshaBujji · Answer

If the statements above are correct, they most strongly support which of the following ?

Type: Inference Question

(A) A method for the protection of moving habitats would have to be developed and implemented to solve the problem of endangered turtles.  Could be correct, Let's check others

(B) Conservationists are not working hard enough to develop a protection method for every kind of habitat. Extreme, We don't know whether conservationists are working/not

(C) In a matter of a few years, loggerhead an leatherback turtles will no longer inhabit the oceans.   No data to prove this, OFS

(D) Other sea animals are also harmed by the fishing industry, and will also become endangered unless the problem is solved.  Although, It seems tempting we don't have data abt other animals, OFS

(E) To control and monitor a three-dimensional ocean habitat, an infrared tagging system should be used.  OFS

Hence A

IanStewart · Answer

This is a very poor question. The last sentence of the stem has an obvious modifier error, and says something different from what it means, and the first sentence has a subject-verb agreement error, so it might be useful as SC practice. But it's fundamentally flawed as a CR question. One fundamental problem: the stem never tells us turtles are endangered. We learn many turtles die from fishing, but that doesn't mean they're endangered -- maybe they reproduce quickly. And even if we assume the specific turtles in the passage are the "endangered turtles" in answer A, answer A is clearly not a valid inference, because it says "A method for the protection of moving habitats would have to be developed and implemented to solve the problem of endangered turtles." Why are these turtles endangered, from the passage? Because of deep sea fishing. So we don't have to develop a monitoring system to protect them. We can just stop deep sea fishing.

None of the answers can be inferred from the passage.

None of the answers can be inferred from the passage.

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.

Every year a large percentage of the population of loggerhead and leat

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

Every year a large percentage of the population of loggerhead and leat

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