Parland's alligator population has been declining in recent years, primarily because of hunting. Alligators prey heavily on a species of...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Paradox

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

Parland's alligator population has been declining in recent years, primarily because of hunting. Alligators prey heavily on a species of freshwater fish that is highly valued as food by Parlanders, who had hoped that the decline in the alligator population would lead to an increase in the numbers of these fish available for human consumption. Yet the population of this fish species has also declined, even though the annual number caught for human consumption has not increased.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the decline in the population of the fish species?

The decline in the alligator population has meant that fishers can work in some parts of lakes and rivers that were formerly too dangerous.

Over the last few years, Parland's commercial fishing enterprises have increased the number of fishing boats they use.

Many Parlanders who hunt alligators do so because of the high market price of alligator skins, not because of the threat alligators pose to the fish population.

During Parland's dry season, holes dug by alligators remain filled with water long enough to provide a safe place for the eggs of this fish species to hatch.

In several neighboring countries through which Parland's rivers also flow, alligators are at risk of extinction as a result of extensive hunting.

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage	Analysis
Parland's alligator population has been declining in recent years, primarily because of hunting.	What it says: Alligator numbers in Parland are going down, mainly due to people hunting them What it does: Sets up the basic situation we're dealing with What it is: Author's factual claim Visualization: Alligator population: 1000 → 600 (declining due to hunting)
Alligators prey heavily on a species of freshwater fish that is highly valued as food by Parlanders, who had hoped that the decline in the alligator population would lead to an increase in the numbers of these fish available for human consumption.	What it says: Alligators eat lots of a fish that people in Parland love to eat, so people thought fewer alligators would mean more fish for them What it does: Explains the food chain relationship and people's expectations based on fewer alligators What it is: Author's explanation of ecological relationship and human expectations Visualization: Food chain: Alligators (600, declining) eat Fish → People expected: Fewer alligators = More fish for humans
Yet the population of this fish species has also declined, even though the annual number caught for human consumption has not increased.	What it says: Surprisingly, fish numbers have also dropped, but people aren't catching more fish than before What it does: Presents the unexpected puzzle that contradicts people's hopes from the previous statement What it is: Author's key observation that creates the paradox Visualization: Expected: Alligators ↓ → Fish ↑ Reality: Alligators ↓ AND Fish ↓ (but human fishing stayed same)

Argument Flow:

The passage presents a ecological puzzle by first establishing that alligator populations are declining due to hunting, then explaining that people expected this to lead to more fish (since alligators eat these fish), but then revealing the surprising fact that fish populations have also declined despite no increase in human fishing.

Main Conclusion:

There's an unexplained decline in fish population that contradicts the expected outcome of fewer alligators leading to more fish.

Logical Structure:

This isn't a traditional argument with premises supporting a conclusion - instead, it's a puzzle setup where we have facts that don't add up as expected, creating a mystery that needs explanation. The logic flows: established fact + reasonable expectation + contradictory reality = puzzle requiring explanation.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Paradox - We need to explain why the fish population declined even though fewer alligators should mean less predation pressure on the fish

Precision of Claims

The key claims involve population changes (alligators declining due to hunting, fish declining despite reduced predation) and human activity levels (fishing catch remaining constant)

Strategy

For paradox questions, we need to find explanations that resolve the apparent contradiction. The puzzle is: fewer alligators eating fish should mean more fish survive, but fish numbers are still going down even though humans aren't catching more. We need to identify alternative causes for fish decline that aren't related to alligator predation or increased human fishing

Answer Choices Explained

The decline in the alligator population has meant that fishers can work in some parts of lakes and rivers that were formerly too dangerous.

This doesn't help explain the fish population decline because the passage already tells us that human fishing hasn't increased - the annual catch for human consumption remained the same. Even if fishers can access new areas, they're apparently not catching more fish overall, so this doesn't resolve our puzzle.

Over the last few years, Parland's commercial fishing enterprises have increased the number of fishing boats they use.

This contradicts the passage information. We're told that the annual number of fish caught for human consumption has NOT increased. If more boats were being used but catches stayed the same, this might explain reduced efficiency but doesn't directly explain the overall population decline we're trying to solve.

Many Parlanders who hunt alligators do so because of the high market price of alligator skins, not because of the threat alligators pose to the fish population.

This explains why people hunt alligators (for profit, not fish protection) but doesn't help us understand why fish populations declined when we'd expect them to increase due to reduced predation pressure.

During Parland's dry season, holes dug by alligators remain filled with water long enough to provide a safe place for the eggs of this fish species to hatch.

This perfectly explains our paradox! It reveals that alligators actually help fish populations by creating essential breeding habitats. When alligator numbers decline, fewer protective water holes are available for fish reproduction, causing fish populations to drop despite reduced predation. This shows that the relationship between alligators and fish is more complex than simple predation.

In several neighboring countries through which Parland's rivers also flow, alligators are at risk of extinction as a result of extensive hunting.

This tells us about regional alligator decline but doesn't explain the specific fish population decline in Parland. The scope is too broad and doesn't address the local ecological relationship we need to understand.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...