Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 02:40 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 02:40
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
 1   2   3   
User avatar
dreamgmat1
User avatar
Joined: 23 May 2007
Last visit: 06 Feb 2008
Posts: 36
Own Kudos:
312
 [294]
Posts: 36
Kudos: 312
 [294]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods Updated on: 08 Jun 2021, 09:10
Originally posted by dreamgmat1 on 08 Jul 2007, 11:46.
Last edited by Bunuel on 08 Jun 2021, 09:10, edited 7 times in total.
Formatted the question.
15
Kudos
Add Kudos
279
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

64% (01:29) correct 36% (01:54) wrong based on 6327 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Source : GMATPrep Default Exam Pack

With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have grown to exceed 175,000.

(A) With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have

(B) With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that do not allow hunting, wildlife officials' estimate of deer population in New Jersey has

(C) With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the deer population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has

(D) Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have

(E) Without natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, wildlife officials in New Jersey estimate a deer population that has
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
C
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,264
Own Kudos:
42,418
 [50]
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,264
Kudos: 42,418
 [50]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 18 Oct 2010, 03:25
34
Kudos
Add Kudos
14
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Choice C becos, it is the only one in which, the modifier phrase introducing the
passage genuinely modifies the intended modified noun the deer population
User avatar
Zarrolou
User avatar
Joined: 02 Sep 2012
Last visit: 11 Dec 2013
Posts: 846
Own Kudos:
5,145
 [43]
Given Kudos: 219
Status:Far, far away!
Location: Italy
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.8
Posts: 846
Kudos: 5,145
 [43]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 19 Jun 2013, 02:13
29
Kudos
Add Kudos
14
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
We can solve this in under 10 seconds if we look at the inital phrase. In every option except C there are refering errors

A. With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have
B. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that donot allow hunting, wildlife officails' estimate of deer population in New Jersey has
C. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the Deer Population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has
D. Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have
E. Without natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighbourhoods where there is no hunting, wildlife officials in New Jersey estimate a deer population that has

I do not care about how the first part is written ("Without VS With no" etc...), about the grammar, but I know that this part refers to the deer population. Only C has this correct counstruct.
Take E for instance, it says that wildlife officials have no natural predators and so on... this is logically incorrect
User avatar
CrackverbalGMAT
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Last visit: 16 Nov 2025
Posts: 4,844
Own Kudos:
8,945
 [12]
Given Kudos: 225
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Location: India
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,844
Kudos: 8,945
 [12]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 09 Dec 2021, 04:40
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
5
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have grown to exceed 175,000.

A. With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have What follows the clause “With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting” should be who are what is being described in this clause. “Wildlife officials” is not what is being described here. So this option does not work.

B. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that do not allow hunting, wildlife officials' estimate of deer population in New Jersey has “Wildlife officials’ estimates” is not what is being described here. So this option does not work.

C. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the deer population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has The clause is referring to the deer population. So this option works.

D. Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have “New Jersey” is not what is being described here. So this option does not work.

E. Without natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, wildlife officials in New Jersey estimate a deer population that has “Wildlife officials” is not what is being described here. So this option does not work.

- Nitha Jay
User avatar
ExpertsGlobal5
User avatar
Experts' Global Representative
Joined: 10 Jul 2017
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,195
Own Kudos:
4,763
 [10]
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT Date: 11-01-2019
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,195
Kudos: 4,763
 [10]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 12 Jan 2022, 04:50
6
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-
dreamgmat1
Source : GMATPrep Default Exam Pack

With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have grown to exceed 175,000.

(A) With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have

(B) With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that do not allow hunting, wildlife officials' estimate of deer population in New Jersey has

(C) With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the deer population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has

(D) Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have

(E) Without natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, wildlife officials in New Jersey estimate a deer population that has
Show more

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of this sentence is that the deer population in New Jersey has no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, and wildlife officials estimate that this deer population has grown to exceed 175,000.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Verb Forms + Parallelism

• In a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun; this is one of the most frequently tested concepts on GMAT sentence correction.
• The present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is also used to refer to actions that concluded in the recent past; however, alongside the use of present perfect tense is redundant if the sentence otherwise indicates that the action concluded in the recent past, such as through the use of “recent” or “recently”.
• Any elements linked by a conjunction ("and" in this sentence) must be parallel.

A: This answer choice incorrectly uses "With no natural predators and...no hunting" to modify "wildlife officials", illogically implying that wildlife officials have no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting; the intended meaning is that the deer population in New Jersey has no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting; please remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun. Further, Option A incorrectly uses the perfect infinitive verb form ("to + have + past participle" - "to have grown" in this sentence) to refer to an action that concluded in the recent past; please remember, the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to refer to actions that concluded in the recent past.

B: This answer choice incorrectly uses "With no natural predators and...no hunting" to modify "wildlife officials' estimate", illogically implying that the wildlife officials' estimate of the New Jersey deer population has no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting; the intended meaning is that the deer population in New Jersey, itself, has no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting; please remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun.

C: Correct. This answer choice correctly uses "With no natural predators and...no hunting" to modify "the deer population in New Jersey", conveying the intended meaning - that the deer population in New Jersey has no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting. Further, Option C uses the phrase "estimate has grown", conveying the intended meaning that wildlife officials estimate that the deer population in New Jersey has grown to exceed 175,000. Additionally, Option C correctly uses the present perfect tense verb "has grown" to refer to an action that concluded in the recent past. Besides, Option C correctly maintains parallelism between "no natural predators" and "expanses of green suburban neighborhoods".

D: This answer choice incorrectly uses "With no natural predators and...suburban neighborhoods" to modify "New Jersey", illogically implying that New Jersey has no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting; the intended meaning is that the deer population in New Jersey has no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting; please remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun. Further, Option D incorrectly uses the perfect infinitive verb form ("to + have + past participle" - "to have grown" in this sentence) to refer to an action that concluded in the recent past; please remember, the present perfect tense (marked by the use of the helping verb “has/have”) is used to refer to actions that concluded in the recent past. Additionally, Option D fails to maintain parallelism between "natural predators" and "no hunting allowed"; please remember, any elements linked by a conjunction ("and" in this sentence) must be parallel.

E: This answer choice incorrectly uses "With no natural predators and...no hunting" to modify "wildlife officials", illogically implying that wildlife officials have no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting; the intended meaning is that the deer population in New Jersey has no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting; please remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun. Moreover, Option E further alters the meaning of the sentence through the phrase "estimate a deer population that has"; the construction of this phrase leads to an incoherent meaning; the intended meaning is that the wildlife officials estimate that the deer population in New Jersey has grown to exceed 175,000.

Hence, C is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Present Perfect Tense" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



To understand the concept of "Simple Tenses" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1 minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team
General Discussion
User avatar
shalva
User avatar
Tuck School Moderator
Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Last visit: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 203
Own Kudos:
342
 [9]
Given Kudos: 69
Location: Tbilisi, Georgia
Schools:Stanford (in), Tuck (WL), Wharton (ding), Cornell (in)
Posts: 203
Kudos: 342
 [9]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 04 Feb 2010, 00:42
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
First question we should ask is - what is the introductory clause modifying?

"With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting" - it can't be wildlife officials or the deer population. This clause clearly describes the peculiarities of New Jersey. So new "New jersey" should immediately follow the clause - and so it does in (D).

Based solely on that fact we already can choose the correct answer.

And for further analysis, it's worth mentioning that "without" seems better than "with no" - therefore (A), (B) and (C) should be considered too wordy and be out
User avatar
ichha148
User avatar
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Last visit: 23 Feb 2023
Posts: 135
Own Kudos:
488
 [10]
Given Kudos: 14
Posts: 135
Kudos: 488
 [10]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 04 Feb 2010, 17:05
10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
humm , good question

First thing - population is singular so , has should be used - A , D out

Between B , C and E B and C are modifying wildlife officials and C is modifying deer
Obviously deer is correct . Predators can not modify wildlife officials :)
User avatar
shekharvineet
User avatar
Joined: 24 Aug 2010
Last visit: 02 Jan 2014
Posts: 103
Own Kudos:
158
 [17]
Given Kudos: 18
Location: Finland
Concentration: Entrepreneuship- Sustainable Manufacturing
Schools:Admitted: IESE($$),HEC, RSM,Esade
GPA: 2.1
WE 1: 3.5 years international
Posts: 103
Kudos: 158
 [17]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 18 Oct 2010, 05:56
12
Kudos
Add Kudos
5
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Pkit
With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have grown to exceed 175,000.

A. With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have

B. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that donot allow hunting, wildlife officails' estimate of deer population in New Jersey has

C. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the Deer Population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has

D. Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have

E. Without natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighbourhoods where there is no hunting, wildlife officials in New Jersey estimate a deer population that has
Show more
I go for C.
This problem is a very good example of ellipsis, as explained by Kaplan. Firstly, the negation is used wrongly. It should be "....no and no..." or "...no or ....". In this sentence the negation is applied to natural predators and to expanses of green suburban neighbourhoods, which is not the intended meaning.
Secondly, parallelism calls for the use of "with" on both sides of the parallel marker. Thirdly, "deer population" is a singular subject and requires a singular verb such as "has".
Lastly, the plural possessive noun (s') is almost always wrong on the GMAT.
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,264
Own Kudos:
42,418
 [18]
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,264
Kudos: 42,418
 [18]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 30 Apr 2011, 06:17
11
Kudos
Add Kudos
6
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The clue hers is to know what or which or who dose not have natural predators. Wildlife officials can not have predators, so dump A, B and E. New Jersey, a place also can not have predators. So drop D. What is left is C, indicating logically that the deer population has no natural predators and that is the obvious choice
User avatar
ChrisLele
User avatar
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Last visit: 27 Jul 2020
Posts: 295
Own Kudos:
4,793
 [2]
Given Kudos: 2
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 295
Kudos: 4,793
 [2]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 12 Jan 2012, 16:37
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Answer (C) is not a case of the double negative. Each ‘no’ occurs in different dependent clauses. The first ‘no’ relates to the absence of natural predators and the second ‘no’ relates to the absence of hunting.

As for the explanation, daagh does a very succinct job of explaining the modifier problem.
User avatar
BeckyRobinsonTPR
User avatar
Princeton Review Representative
Joined: 17 Jun 2013
Last visit: 19 May 2014
Posts: 147
Own Kudos:
1,010
 [4]
Posts: 147
Kudos: 1,010
 [4]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 19 Jun 2013, 09:56
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
PTK
With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have grown to exceed 175,000.

A. With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have
B. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that donot allow hunting, wildlife officails' estimate of deer population in new Jersey has
C. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the Deer Population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has
D. Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have
E. Without natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighbourhoods where there is no hunting, wildlife officials in New Jersey estimate a deer population that has
Show more
There is a subject verb agreement issue at the end of the sentence. the population is singular so we need has - this eliminates A and D. B, C and D all have the same type of modifier so the way the begining is worded is not at issue adn teh different between without and with no is an issue of style, not grammar. B says that the officials estimate as grown, not the deer population so it changes the meaning and is wrong. In E the begining phrase modifies wildlife officials, not the deer population so E is wrong and C is hte best answer.
User avatar
BeckyRobinsonTPR
User avatar
Princeton Review Representative
Joined: 17 Jun 2013
Last visit: 19 May 2014
Posts: 147
Own Kudos:
1,010
 [1]
Posts: 147
Kudos: 1,010
 [1]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 31 Aug 2013, 15:32
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
surya167
The answer to this question is definitely not clear. Why is D not correct? Can someone who has got this correct can please explain this .. will help all of us!
Show more

"without natural preditors" is a modifier and as written, it modifies New Jersey, which is incorrect.

In C deer can have green expanses where hunting is not allowed therefore this is an appropriate modifier
User avatar
EducationAisle
User avatar
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,891
Own Kudos:
3,579
 [3]
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: ISB
Posts: 3,891
Kudos: 3,579
 [3]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 11 Sep 2013, 04:20
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
D seems to suggest that New Jersey does not have natural predators; the intent is to convey that the deer population does not have natural predators. Also, D does not seem to be very clear in meaning:

Without natural predators and (without) no hunting allowed in expanse of green suburban neighborhoods?

A better construct would have been:

Without natural predators and with no hunting allowed in expanse of green suburban neighborhoods... (though problem mentioned above about New Jersey would still have remained).

By the way, If C was:

With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, wildlife officials estimate that the deer population in New Jersey has grown to exceed 175,000

Again this would have suggested that wildlife officials have no natural predators : )
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
32,884
 [9]
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,884
 [9]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 11 Sep 2013, 13:42
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
deepak1990verma
Hi,

With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have grown to exceed 175,000


A. With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have

B. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that do not allow hunting, wildlife officials' estimate of the deer population in New Jersey has

C. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the deer population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has

D. Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanse of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have

E. Without natural predators and with expanses of green neighborhoods where there is no hunting, wildlife officials in New Jersey estimate a deer population that has

In this question I got stuck between C and D ,

Choice C says --> The deer population with no natural predators led to increase deer's population

While D says ---> New Jersey Without Natural predators led to increase deer population because there are no predators to feed on deer in New jersey .

So both meant the same , but I eliminated C for some other reason .

In C :

With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the deer population in New Jersey,
Quote:
wildlife officials estimate
, has

wildlife officials estimate : Independent Clause ,Which has been joined with other I.C

(subject) (verb)

But OA is C :

Is my logic of neglecting C wrong ;I have never seen such type construction anywhere but have seen such construction with some preposition , verb+ed ,or verb+ing modifier .Hence, I thought that the above construction is I.C and neglected it .

Have I overthought it or this is also a possible construction .

Thanks, Deepak
Show more


Hi Deepak,

Thanks for posting your question here :-)

Meaning is the key to solve this one.

According to wildlife official estimate, deer population in New Jersey has grown to exceed 175,000/ What is the reason for this growth? There are two reasons mentioned in the sentence.
1. Deer in New Jersey have no natural predators.
2. Deer have expanses of green suburban neighborhood where hunting is not allowed.
Both these factors account for increase in the number of deer in New Jersey.

However, the opening modifiers in all the answer choices, except for Choice D, refer to the incorrect entity.

Now let's come to Choice C the construction of which has confused you:

Choice C: With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the deer population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has

One way to understand this structure is to understand the role of this clause "wildlife official estimate". What is it that they have estimated? They have estimated the deer population in New Jersey. So in essence, "wildlife official estimate" acts as a noun modifier that refers to "the deer population in New Jersey".

Look at the following example:
I will have the pizza I usually order.

This sentence may also appear to be having two independent clauses. But that is not the case. The clause "I usually order" actually modifies "the pizza". The sentence can be written as:
I will have the pizza that I usually order.

Something similar is happening in Choice C of this official question. So the clause "wildlife officials estimate" is not an independent clause but a dependent clause and hence does not lead to fragment error.

Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,264
Own Kudos:
42,418
 [4]
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,264
Kudos: 42,418
 [4]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 25 Jan 2017, 08:40
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have grown to exceed 175,000


There is no need to kneejerk on this simple question that is deceptively daunting. Just look at the modification alone. The introductory modifier should modify its most logical noun, namely 'the deer population'. cool enough?

A. With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have -- It is wrong to ascribe wildlife officials to the modified noun. How can wildlife official be with or without natural predators or greenery?
B. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that do not allow hunting, wildlife officials' estimate of the deer population in New Jersey has -- The same problem as in A.

C. With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the deer population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has -- The correct modified noun and the correct choice.
D. Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanse of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have-- New Jersey is a wrong modified noun as in A and B.

E. Without natural predators and with expanses of green neighborhoods where there is no hunting, wildlife officials in New Jersey estimate a deer population that has -- The same problem. as in all other incorrect choices.


Thus, in one stroke you are at Rome.

It may be also noted that 'to have ' is not a verb; it is as an infinitive. Hence, it does not feature sub-verb element. 'have' is the base form of the verb. You will never see 'to has' in English
avatar
diceq
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2018
Last visit: 11 Dec 2018
Posts: 1
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Posts: 1
Kudos: 1
 [1]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 25 Nov 2018, 08:18
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
If you do not only take sentence structure into account, they are all wrong. The fact is though that only C has the correct sentence structure. In all the other answers the "with no natural predators" could refer to "the wildlife officials" or in the case of D "New Jersey".

A. Officials could be prey.
B. Officials could be prey.
C. Right sentence structure and coherence.
D. Jersey could be prey.
E. Officials could be prey.

Why is C wrong? It changes the meaning. No hunting allowed does not imply that there is no hunting. One can suggest the other, but that is making your own assumptions, which you should always avoid on GMAT.

The question should be tossed.
avatar
Marger
avatar
Joined: 10 Aug 2016
Last visit: 11 May 2020
Posts: 25
Own Kudos:
14
Given Kudos: 2
Location: Ireland
Schools: HBS '22 (D) Booth '22 (S) Stanford '22 Kellogg '22 Wharton '22 (S)
GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Schools: HBS '22 (D) Booth '22 (S) Stanford '22 Kellogg '22 Wharton '22 (S)
GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Posts: 25
Kudos: 14
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 23 Feb 2019, 10:19
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For C it seems like " and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting" is referring to the Deer Population. Is there a specific rule for this because all of the answers seem wrong here to me as I don't see how that makes sense.
User avatar
generis
User avatar
Senior SC Moderator
Joined: 22 May 2016
Last visit: 18 Jun 2022
Posts: 5,272
Own Kudos:
37,385
 [2]
Given Kudos: 9,464
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,272
Kudos: 37,385
 [2]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 23 Feb 2019, 12:27
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
dreamgmat1
Source : GMATPrep Default Exam Pack

With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have grown to exceed 175,000.

(A) With no natural predators and expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that allow no hunting, wildlife officials estimate the New Jersey deer population to have

(B) With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods that do not allow hunting, wildlife officials' estimate of deer population in New Jersey has

(C) With no natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, the deer population in New Jersey, wildlife officials estimate, has

(D) Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have

(E) Without natural predators and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting, wildlife officials in New Jersey estimate a deer population that has
Show more
Marger
For C it seems like " and with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting" is referring to the Deer Population. Is there a specific rule for this because all of the answers seem wrong here to me as I don't see how that makes sense.
Show more
Marger , I do not understand exactly what you are asking.

You write that with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods where there is no hunting "seems" as if it is referring to the deer population.
That phrase indeed refers to the deer population.

What do you mean by "this" in "Is there a specific rule for this?" This what?
I wrote a post about introductory phrases that begin with prepositions here.
In that instance the preposition was in. In this instance the preposition is with.
That post contains guidelines. Introductory prepositional phrases differ from five other kinds of introductory phrases.
Stricter rules govern the latter.

And what part, logically, does not "make sense"?

In this statement, both prepositional phrases (with + phrase) modify the subject of the sentence.

Both of the with phrases give us information that helps to unravel the meaning of the sentence.

• Meaning: The deer population in New Jersey does not contend with forces such as natural predators or hunters in hunting areas that might curb the deer population's growth, and officials estimate that the population has grown to exceed 175,000.

• WITH + phrase is a prepositional modifier

The target noun deer population in New Jersey is preceded by its prepositional descriptors (the "with" statements).

What is true of the deer population in New Jersey?
-- The deer population in New Jersey has no natural predators that would curb deer population growth.
-- The deer population in New Jersey has expanses of suburban neighborhoods in which to roam. Hunting is not allowed
in those neighborhoods, hunting that also would curb deer population growth.
-- Without curbs, the deer population has grown. Officials estimate . . .

• WITH?

Oxford Online U.S. Dictionary, here, defines with as possessing (something) as a feature or accompaniment.

Cambridge Online Dictionary, here, defines with as having or possessing (someone or something).

In this official question, here, just as is the case in this question, an introductory phrase headed by the preposition with modifies a sensible noun.

The deer population in New Jersey has no curbs on its growth; the population has no natural predators and has roaming areas in which hunting is not allowed.

-- Awkward rewrite: Wildlife officials estimate that the deer population in New Jersey, with no natural predators [that might curb population growth] and with habitats in which to roam where no hunting is allowed [hunting that might curb population growth], has grown to exceed 175,000.
-- The with-clauses are up front to avoid splitting two different subjects: wildlife officials (estimate that . . . ) and the deer population (which has grown . . .).

Sometimes "with" modification is easier to understand if the with phrase follows the subject.

Example from Oxford dictionary cited above:
After all, people with money and status employ other people to clean up after them.
After all, people who have money and status employ other people to clean up after them.

In the official question cited above, the first part of the sentence, not underlined, is:
With its plan to develop seven and a half acres of shore land, Cleveland is but one of a large number of communities . . .
Cleveland has a plan to develop seven and a half acres of shore land . . . .

• No other subject makes sense
Whose population is growing?
What noun has no natural predators in New Jersey?

Wildlife officials, as in options A, B, and E?
No.

New Jersey, as in option D?
No.

The deer population in New Jersey has no natural predators (and has areas in which to roam where hunting is not allowed).
The deer population has grown because it has no or few curbs on its growth.

Hope that explanation helps.
User avatar
shabuzen102
User avatar
Joined: 11 Aug 2019
Last visit: 24 Jul 2020
Posts: 67
Own Kudos:
26
Given Kudos: 111
Posts: 67
Kudos: 26
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 12 Nov 2019, 07:46
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Dear Expert,

I'm confused by many responses to this question.

First of all, some have said D has wrong S + V agreement, they seem to say that the correct answer has to have "HAS" instead of "HAVE"

"Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have grown to exceed 50,000"

I think "to have grown" is perfectly fine, and "to HAS GROWN" is absolutely wrong.
Why are some people saying it has to be the latter? Please clarify!

Second of all, for C, I have a hard time wrapping my head around "the deer population, with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, has grown to exceed" since I think only a LOCATION, like New Jersey, can have expanses of green suburban neighborhood. Like New York has many streets, or "Colorado, with lots of mountains."
How can a population (deer population to be specific), which is an abstract concept, to have a physical expanses of green neighborhood?

Is there any parallel example to this?

I also think that "without natural predators" can modify New Jersey. Some areas in the world have many predators, like lions or tigers, while there are other parts of the world like in New Zealand, there were mostly birds and no predators.

If we argue that "predators" can only be a predator in respect to another animal, then it should be the deer in New Jersey, not deer population. When you think of population, you think of a number.

For those reason, I think C is not the correct answer and D seems better to me. Thanks!
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,445
Own Kudos:
69,782
 [5]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,445
Kudos: 69,782
 [5]
With no natural predators and expenses of green suburban neighborhoods 21 Nov 2019, 22:04
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shabuzen102
Dear Expert,

I'm confused by many responses to this question.

First of all, some have said D has wrong S + V agreement, they seem to say that the correct answer has to have "HAS" instead of "HAVE"

"Without natural predators and no hunting allowed in expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, New Jersey has a deer population that wildlife officials estimate to have grown to exceed 50,000"

I think "to have grown" is perfectly fine, and "to HAS GROWN" is absolutely wrong.
Why are some people saying it has to be the latter? Please clarify!

Second of all, for C, I have a hard time wrapping my head around "the deer population, with expanses of green suburban neighborhoods, has grown to exceed" since I think only a LOCATION, like New Jersey, can have expanses of green suburban neighborhood. Like New York has many streets, or "Colorado, with lots of mountains."
How can a population (deer population to be specific), which is an abstract concept, to have a physical expanses of green neighborhood?

Is there any parallel example to this?

I also think that "without natural predators" can modify New Jersey. Some areas in the world have many predators, like lions or tigers, while there are other parts of the world like in New Zealand, there were mostly birds and no predators.

If we argue that "predators" can only be a predator in respect to another animal, then it should be the deer in New Jersey, not deer population. When you think of population, you think of a number.

For those reason, I think C is not the correct answer and D seems better to me. Thanks!
Show more
I think it's fair to say that an animal or animal population can have green expanses in which to roam, but I see your point about the possibility of a location not having predators, so let's find another problem with (D).

Typically, when we write "without x and y," we're talking about two elements that are missing. For example, "Tim, utterly without wit and charm, is often the butt of the joke at cocktail parties." Tim lacks two qualities: wit and charm. Makes sense.

But now look at (D): "Without natural predators and no hunting..." So, the two elements lacking are "natural predators" and "no hunting?" It makes no sense to write that something is "without no hunting," so now there's a clear logical error in (D). We might not love (C), but "neighborhoods where there is no hunting" is far clearer and more logical than "without no hunting," so that's what we're left with. (C) is our answer.

Takeaway: you don't have to love every element of the correct answer. Often, you won't. It's far better to look for why the four other options are inferior, and then select the best, or least bad, of the bunch.

I hope that helps!
 1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts