Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 20:12 It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 20:12
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
freedom128
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Last visit: 01 Oct 2020
Posts: 939
Own Kudos:
1,377
 [11]
Given Kudos: 402
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.8
Products:
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V40
Posts: 939
Kudos: 1,377
 [11]
5
Kudos
Add Kudos
6
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
unraveled
Joined: 07 Mar 2019
Last visit: 10 Apr 2025
Posts: 2,706
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 763
Location: India
WE:Sales (Energy)
Posts: 2,706
Kudos: 2,329
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
ravigupta2912
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 26 May 2019
Last visit: 16 Feb 2025
Posts: 717
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 84
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q46 V34
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V40
GPA: 2.58
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
Products:
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
freedom128
Joined: 30 Sep 2017
Last visit: 01 Oct 2020
Posts: 939
Own Kudos:
1,377
 [5]
Given Kudos: 402
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.8
Products:
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V40
Posts: 939
Kudos: 1,377
 [5]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Here is the answer explanation:

(A) The only measurements we get in the stimulus are of "fish, by weight." The stimulus never tells us the absolute number of fish (either in the sea, or being harvested by the industry). Thus, the information in the answer choice is "new information," and we cannot be certain about it.

(B) goes beyond what the stimulus tells us, because we only know what changes the technical sophistication of the industry's equipment experienced, and what those changes enabled, during the years between 1955 and 2000. We do not know what happened to that technical sophistication, or what it enabled, after 2000.

(C) goes beyond what the stimulus states. We only know that the harvest did not increase after 1990. We have no way of knowing if it declined.

(D) goes beyond what the stimulus tells us. We only know what happened to the technical sophistication of fishing equipment between 1955 and 2000. We know nothing about what happened to that sophistication before 1955.

(E) CORRECT ANSWER. For the industry's harvest to stay the same each year from 1990 to 2000, even though it was capturing a greater percentage of the weight of fish in the sea in each of those years, the total weight of fish in the sea had to decline. For example, let's say the industry caught 70% of the weight of fish in the sea in 1990 and 85% of the weight of fish in the sea in 2000. And let's also say that in each of those years the industry had the same total harvest of 1,000,000 pounds. Then the total weight of fish in the sea in 1990 would've been a little over 1.4 million pounds, and the total weight of fish in the sea in 2000 would've been a little less than 1.2 million pounds (a decline).

FINAL ANSWER IS (E)
User avatar
ravigupta2912
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 26 May 2019
Last visit: 16 Feb 2025
Posts: 717
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 84
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q46 V34
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V40
GPA: 2.58
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
Products:
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
chondro48
ravigupta2912 and lnm87, here is the explanation from Powerscore forum.

(A) The only measurements we get in the stimulus are of "fish, by weight." The stimulus never tells us the absolute number of fish (either in the sea, or being harvested by the industry). Thus, the information in the answer choice is "new information," and we cannot be certain about it.

(B) goes beyond what the stimulus tells us, because we only know what changes the technical sophistication of the industry's equipment experienced, and what those changes enabled, during the years between 1955 and 2000. We do not know what happened to that technical sophistication, or what it enabled, after 2000.

(C) goes beyond what the stimulus states. We only know that the harvest did not increase after 1990. We have no way of knowing if it declined.

(D) goes beyond what the stimulus tells us. We only know what happened to the technical sophistication of fishing equipment between 1955 and 2000. We know nothing about what happened to that sophistication before 1955.

(E) CORRECT ANSWER. For the industry's harvest to stay the same each year from 1990 to 2000, even though it was capturing a greater percentage of the weight of fish in the sea in each of those years, the total weight of fish in the sea had to decline. For example, let's say the industry caught 70% of the weight of fish in the sea in 1990 and 85% of the weight of fish in the sea in 2000. And let's also say that in each of those years the industry had the same total harvest of 1,000,000 pounds. Then the total weight of fish in the sea in 1990 would've been a little over 1.4 million pounds, and the total weight of fish in the sea in 2000 would've been a little less than 1.2 million pounds (a decline).

FINAL ANSWER IS (E)

Okay, so since the industry's harvest did not increase, the percentage increase can only be if the world's fishing population (by weight) declined. Makes sense. How on earth did I miss this?! :(
User avatar
unraveled
Joined: 07 Mar 2019
Last visit: 10 Apr 2025
Posts: 2,706
Own Kudos:
2,329
 [1]
Given Kudos: 763
Location: India
WE:Sales (Energy)
Posts: 2,706
Kudos: 2,329
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
chondro48
ravigupta2912 and lnm87, here is the explanation from Powerscore forum.

(A) The only measurements we get in the stimulus are of "fish, by weight." The stimulus never tells us the absolute number of fish (either in the sea, or being harvested by the industry). Thus, the information in the answer choice is "new information," and we cannot be certain about it.

(B) goes beyond what the stimulus tells us, because we only know what changes the technical sophistication of the industry's equipment experienced, and what those changes enabled, during the years between 1955 and 2000. We do not know what happened to that technical sophistication, or what it enabled, after 2000.

(C) goes beyond what the stimulus states. We only know that the harvest did not increase after 1990. We have no way of knowing if it declined.

(D) goes beyond what the stimulus tells us. We only know what happened to the technical sophistication of fishing equipment between 1955 and 2000. We know nothing about what happened to that sophistication before 1955.

(E) CORRECT ANSWER. For the industry's harvest to stay the same each year from 1990 to 2000, even though it was capturing a greater percentage of the weight of fish in the sea in each of those years, the total weight of fish in the sea had to decline. For example, let's say the industry caught 70% of the weight of fish in the sea in 1990 and 85% of the weight of fish in the sea in 2000. And let's also say that in each of those years the industry had the same total harvest of 1,000,000 pounds. Then the total weight of fish in the sea in 1990 would've been a little over 1.4 million pounds, and the total weight of fish in the sea in 2000 would've been a little less than 1.2 million pounds (a decline).

FINAL ANSWER IS (E)

In A, 'each' is problematic and specific number is also no given. E was runner up for me so eliminated. Only makes sense.
Thanks buddy...!
avatar
Asalways
Joined: 09 Jul 2019
Last visit: 24 May 2020
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 10
Posts: 8
Kudos: 5
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
chondro48
lnm87 and Asalways, generously provide bookmark for the question above. Thankss

(A) The only measurements we get in the stimulus are of "fish, by weight." The stimulus never tells us the absolute number of fish (either in the sea, or being harvested by the industry). Thus, the information in the answer choice is "new information," and we cannot be certain about it.

(B) goes beyond what the stimulus tells us, because we only know what changes the technical sophistication of the industry's equipment experienced, and what those changes enabled, during the years between 1955 and 2000. We do not know what happened to that technical sophistication, or what it enabled, after 2000.

(C) goes beyond what the stimulus states. We only know that the harvest did not increase after 1990. We have no way of knowing if it declined.

(D) goes beyond what the stimulus tells us. We only know what happened to the technical sophistication of fishing equipment between 1955 and 2000. We know nothing about what happened to that sophistication before 1955.

(E) CORRECT ANSWER. For the industry's harvest to stay the same each year from 1990 to 2000, even though it was capturing a greater percentage of the weight of fish in the sea in each of those years, the total weight of fish in the sea had to decline. For example, let's say the industry caught 70% of the weight of fish in the sea in 1990 and 85% of the weight of fish in the sea in 2000. And let's also say that in each of those years the industry had the same total harvest of 1,000,000 pounds. Then the total weight of fish in the sea in 1990 would've been a little over 1.4 million pounds, and the total weight of fish in the sea in 2000 would've been a little less than 1.2 million pounds (a decline).

FINAL ANSWER IS (E)

I also got wrong for this question. A is more convincing than E, but on second thought E is the winner
User avatar
kntombat
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 28 Feb 2020
Last visit: 19 Jan 2023
Posts: 865
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 839
Location: India
WE:Other (Other)
Posts: 865
Kudos: 530
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Why is E the answer ? would love to hear an expert's take on this
User avatar
svasan05
User avatar
CrackVerbal Representative
Joined: 02 Mar 2019
Last visit: 24 Feb 2023
Posts: 269
Own Kudos:
312
 [2]
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 269
Kudos: 312
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A) After 1990, the number of fish harvested each year by the fishing industry increased, but the average weight of each fish harvested decreased This may or may not be true. Given that the total weight of fish did not increase after 1990, it could be a decrease due to a reduction in average weight of fish or due to a reduction in the number of fish itself, or both, or the weight could have remained the same. From the passage, we do not know which is the case. Eliminate.

B) After 2000, improvements in fishing equipment did not enable the fishing industry to harvest a greater percentage of the total amount of fish, by weight, in the world's ocean What happened after 2000 is irrelevant to the facts given in the passage. Eliminate.

C) The fishing industry's harvest, by weight, was significantly lower in 2000 than it was in 1990 We do not know that the harvest by weight was lower in 2000 at all, let alone significantly. The passage only states that the weight "did not increase". Eliminate.

D) No significant improvements in fishing equipment occurred before 1955. We know nothing about what happened or did not happen before 1955 from the passage. Eliminate.

E) The total amount of fish, by weight, in the world's ocean decreased during the period from 1990 through 2000 Correct answer - this must be true. The passage states that the proportion of fish harvested ie; (weight of fish harvested / total weight of fish) increased every year from 1955 to 2000, which includes the period 1990 to 2000. The passage also states that the total weight of fish harvested did not increase from 1990 to 2000. This is only possible if there is a decrease in the denominator ie; total weight of fish (since there is no increase in the numerator but an increase in the proportion).

Hope this helps.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ravigupta2912
I chose A.

B&D out since the passage no where talks or provides info about periods prior to 1955 or after 2000.

C out since the passage states that the harvest after 1990 did not increase but that does not imply it decreased.

E out since there is nothing in the passage to suggest that the percentage harvest increased only due to reduction in total amount of fish in the ocean.

It can be very well possible that harvesting growth rates outstripped the growth in total amount of fish in the oceans thus leading to a plateau in the overall catchment after a point of time (and passage suggests the same that increase in harvest did not occur after 1990)

I didn't find any strong reason to accept A either.

Quite confused about this question. Experts help please!


Posted from my mobile device


The reason behind this is:
In a must be true question, all answers are supposed to stem from the premise and can't really have any new information. The passage is not talking about the NUMBER of fish. It's talking about the weight. So this reason makes (E) a solid contender. Also, the statement explains the gap identified.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
501 posts
358 posts