Wolves generally avoid human settlements. For this reason, domestic sh

Question

Wolves generally avoid human settlements. For this reason, domestic sheep, though essentially easy prey for wolves, are not usually attacked by them. In Hylantia prior to 1910, farmers nevertheless lost considerable numbers of sheep to wolves each year. Attributing this to the large number for wolves, in 1910 the government began offering rewards to hunters for killing wolves. From 1910 to 1915, large numbers of wolves were killed. Yet wolf attacks on sheep increased significantly.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the increase in wolf attacks on sheep?

(A) Populations of deer and other wild animals that wolves typically prey on increased significantly in numbers from 1910 to 1915.

(B) Prior to 1910, there were no legal restrictions in Hylantia on the hunting of wolves.

(C) After 1910 hunters shot and wounded a substantial number of wolves, thereby greatly diminishing these wolves' ability to prey on wild animals.

(D) Domestic sheep are significantly less able than most wild animals to defend themselves against wolf attacks.

(E) The systematic hunting of wolves encouraged by the program drove many wolves in Hylantia to migrate to remote mountain areas uninhabited by humans.

Show Spoiler

ID: 500396
07099-D

Attachment:

Q30.jpg [ 83.3 KiB | Viewed 44588 times ]

Show Answer

Official Answer

Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/Login.

Every tricky question should trigger a follow up quiz. Build that habit with GMAT Club Forum Quiz →.

souvik101990 · Accepted Answer

Good to see this question again. 
Posting an answer posted by someone else

Professor · Answer

Good question!!!!!!!!!!!!

its between C and D. the attacks on sheep was increased not because of sheeps' inabilities but because of wolves' inabilities to hunt wild animals. wolves couldnot attack wild animals. therefore they are forced to attack on demostic sheeps. 

therefore its C not D.

gk3.14 · Answer

Argument:
domestic sheep -> easy prey
but wolves do not generally attack

More wolves -> less prey so they attackk sheep

another reason could be less wolves cannot attack normal prey - so they attack sheep - easy prey

donkadsw · Answer

Conclusion: People thought wolves attacked Sheep. So wolves were shot down. However, Sheep attacks increased instead of being decreased.

A. Populations of deer and other wild animals that wolves typically prey on increased significantly in numbers from 1910 to 1915.  - does not explain the finding that sheep attacks increased.

B. Prior to 1910, there were no legal restrictions in Hylantia on the hunting of wolves.  - Irrelevant

C. After 1910 hunters shot and wounded a substantial number of wolves, thereby greatly diminishing these wolvesâ€™ ability to prey on wild animals.  - These wild animals may have increased in number or activity after wolves were shot down, so these wild animals in turn may have attacked Sheep. Explains the finding that Sheep attacks increased

D. Domestic sheep are significantly less able than most wild animals to defend themselves against wolf attacks.  - doesn't explain why the attacks increased

E. The systematic hunting of wolves encouraged by the program drove many wolves in Hylantia to migrate to remote mountain areas uninhabited by humans.  - So Sheep attacks should decrease! But why did they increase?

RaguramanS · Answer

Premise:  
Avoid Human prey, did not rely completely on sheep
Increase in number of wolves, increase in sheep prey
Decrease in number of wolves but increase in sheep prey

Keyword:   Resolve the Paradox

A. Populations of deer and other wild animals that wolves typically prey on increased significantly in numbers from 1910 to 1915. 
If the above is true then the population of sheep should have decreased  Incorrect 
B. Prior to 1910, there were no legal restrictions in Hylantia on the hunting of wolves.
Legal restrictions are not discussed in the argument  Irrelevant 
C. After 1910 hunters shot and wounded a substantial number of wolves, thereby greatly diminishing these wolvesâ€™ ability to prey on wild animals.
This gives a reason for the decrease as wolves are not able to find another prey  Correct  
D. Domestic sheep are significantly less able than most wild animals to defend themselves against wolf attacks.
Sheep can't defend despite its numbers  Irrelevant 
E. The systematic hunting of wolves encouraged by the program drove many wolves in Hylantia to migrate to remote mountain areas uninhabited by humans.
This not explain the paradox  Irrelevant

Mike03 · Answer

Can anyone help me understand the difference between A & C? Thanks!

brianshepherd · Answer

I saw this question on my GMATprep exam. I answered "C" but the answer was marked as wrong and "B" was shown as the correct answer.

Is this a mistake?

https://ibb.co/pXHfpcm

nightblade354 · Answer

We can't see the image, but I assume that it is a similar question stem with a different question attached to it/different answer choices.

OhMy · Answer

brianshepherd 
In the image B is marked by you and C is shown as the correct answer.

Victz · Answer

Put yourself in the "shoes" of wolves, you'll start think about "why would I go after sheep despite the danger of getting shot"?
Not to revenge, but to feed the family! D is repeating the background info. E actually makes it more surprising - you'd imagine there are less domestic sheep in the middle of no where.

emcheeks · Answer

Wolves generally avoid human settlements. For this reason, domestic sheep, though essentially easy prey for wolves, are not usually attacked by them. In Hylantia prior to 1910, farmers nevertheless lost considerable numbers of sheep to wolves each year. Attributing this to the large number for wolves, in 1910 the government began offering rewards to hunters for killing wolves. From 1910 to 1915, large numbers of wolves were killed. Yet wolf attacks on sheep increased significantly.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the increase in wolf attacks on sheep?

(C) After 1910 hunters shot and wounded a substantial number of wolves, thereby greatly diminishing these wolves' ability to prey on wild animals.

Pay close attention! C is saying that wolves generally don't prey on  wild  animals now --> they start to prey on  domestic  animals because they have to survive somehow. Therefore, C explains why wolf attack increases.
 
(E) The systematic hunting of wolves encouraged by the program drove many wolves in Hylantia to migrate to remote mountain areas uninhabited by humans.

Here, it is driving wolves not driving sheep to remote mountain areas. Since wolfs are going to uninhabited place, they are away from the sheep --> doesn't explain the increase. But if it were the sheep which migrated to remote and uninhabited places, sheep are a step closer to the wolves which tend to avoid human settlements. Then in this case, the increment in Wolseysf attacks will be justified.

ProfChaos · Answer

I think everyone could narrow it down to C and D

D is incorrect because the ability of sheep to defend themselves didnt change throughout this period. It is not like sheep were initially more able than other animals to defend themselves and now they less able to do so BECAUSE of the killings of wolves.

We need a reason to explain why even after large numbers of wolves were killed, attacks on sheep didnt decrease but increase.

Thus C is correct

Fdambro294 · Answer

Just a short input.

The issue I see with Answer D is that the sheep ALWAYS had this trait of not being able to defend themselves.

We’re trying to resolve a paradox that happened after 1910. An answer that gives a fact that has always been true about the sheep can’t resolve this apparent paradox from 1910 to 1915.

The sheep couldn’t defend themselves before 1910. They still can’t defend themselves after 1915. So how can it be the case that after a large number of wolves were shot, the sheep deaths INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY.

We’re looking for some kind of change or force that lead to this odd result. If more wolves are shot, and the sheep couldn’t defend themselves before and still can’t defend themselves now, then why is it that the number of sheep deaths Keeps INCREASING?

D does not explain this.

Posted from my mobile device

aimat780 · Answer

(A) Populations of deer and other wild animals that wolves typically prey on increased significantly in numbers from 1910 to 1915:  this statement actually runs contrary to the given solution

(B) Prior to 1910, there were no legal restrictions in Hylantia on the hunting of wolves:  so what?? it doesn't has any impact why even after being culled, the wolves kept on hunting sheep

(C) After 1910 hunters shot and wounded a substantial number of wolves, thereby greatly diminishing these wolves' ability to prey on wild animals:  Bingo, this looks good

(D) Domestic sheep are significantly less able than most wild animals to defend themselves against wolf attacks:  Ok, but how does it explains before/ after 1910 effect??

(E) The systematic hunting of wolves encouraged by the program drove many wolves in Hylantia to migrate to remote mountain areas uninhabited by humans:  nope, not at all

mba757 · Answer

Resolve paradox = no conclusion
 
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the increase in wolf attacks on sheep?

A. Populations of deer and other wild animals that wolves typically prey on increased significantly in numbers from 1910 to 1915.
 This almost makes the paradox even weirder. If more other prey, then why kill the sheep?
 
B. Prior to 1910, there were no legal restrictions in Hylantia on the hunting of wolves.
 Doesn’t matter what happened before 1910 – we’re concerned with 1910-1915 and why despite the killings of wolves did sheep attacks increase. But if anything, this could almost strengthen if you spin it. There were a bunch of wolves before. But starting in 1910, maybe hunters went ham and killed a bunch of wolves. So why if wolf population went down, why would sheep attacks increase? 
 
C. After 1910 hunters shot and wounded a substantial number of wolves, thereby greatly diminishing these wolves' ability to prey on wild animals.
 This sounds off, but it resolves the paradox. Wolves are wounded and their ability to hunt isn’t so great. If you’re wounded and can’t hunt to well, but you still need to eat…wouldn’t you eat the easy prey? Perhaps sheep? How do we know that sheep are easy prey? Stimulus explicitly says so – “domestic sheep…essentially easy prey for wolves…”
 
D. Domestic sheep are significantly less able than most wild animals to defend themselves against wolf attacks.
 This could strengthen if anything. Sheep = defenseless. But regardless, this would be true even before more wolves were killed. So sheep are less able than other animals and were killed before by a large population of wolves. But if there’s a smaller population of wolves, wouldn’t it mean the wolves be able to kill fewer? Doesn’t resolve anything. No need to extrapolate further than this.
 
E. The systematic hunting of wolves encouraged by the program drove many wolves in Hylantia to migrate to remote mountain areas uninhabited by humans.
 Makes the problem even worse. They not only were killed but all moved away. So why sheep killings?

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

The argument says-

1) In Hylantia prior to 1910, farmers lost considerable numbers of sheep to wolves each year.
2) Because of this, in 1910, the government began offering rewards to hunters for killing wolves.
3) From 1910 to 1915, large numbers of wolves were killed.

YET,

wolf attacks on sheep increased significantly.

How? Why? - The answer to this will resolve the paradox that we have in the argument.

Option A- Populations of deer and other wild animals that wolves typically prey on increased significantly in numbers from 1910 to 1915. - The conclusion talks about the wolf attacks on sheep, not deer and other wild animals-  eliminate option A

Option B- Prior to 1910, there were no legal restrictions in Hylantia on the hunting of wolves. - This doesn’t resolve the paradox that we have -  Eliminate option B

Option C- After 1910, hunters shot and wounded a substantial number of wolves, thereby greatly diminishing these wolves' ability to prey on wild animals. - This tells us why the wolf attacks on sheep increased after 1915. 
 
 Because the wolves were wounded from the attacks of hunters after 1910, the wolves’ ability to attack and prey on wild animals diminished. As a result, the wolf attacks on sheep increased. This resolves the paradox present in the argument.

Option D- Domestic sheep are significantly less able than most wild animals to defend themselves against wolf attacks- This does not explain the increase in wolf attacks on sheep.  Eliminate option D

Option E- The systematic hunting of wolves encouraged by the program drove many wolves in Hylantia to migrate to remote mountain areas uninhabited by humans. - If wolves in Hylantia migrated to remote mountain areas, it should have led to a decrease and not increase in wolf attacks on sheep-  eliminate option E

Vishnupriya
CrackVerbal Prep team

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.

Wolves generally avoid human settlements. For this reason, domestic sh

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Wolves generally avoid human settlements. For this reason, domestic sh

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