Some species of Arctic birds are threatened by recent sharp increases in the population of snow geese, which breed in...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
Some species of Arctic birds are threatened by recent sharp increases in the population of snow geese, which breed in the Arctic and are displacing birds of less vigorous species. Although snow geese are a popular quarry for hunters in the southern regions where they winter, the hunting season ends if and when hunting has reduced the population by five percent, according to official estimates. Clearly, dropping this restriction would allow the other species to recover.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument?
Passage Analysis:
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Some species of Arctic birds are threatened by recent sharp increases in the population of snow geese, which breed in the Arctic and are displacing birds of less vigorous species. |
|
| Although snow geese are a popular quarry for hunters in the southern regions where they winter, the hunting season ends if and when hunting has reduced the population by five percent, according to official estimates. |
|
| Clearly, dropping this restriction would allow the other species to recover. |
|
Argument Flow:
The argument starts by identifying a problem (snow geese overpopulation threatening other birds), then describes a current policy limitation (5% hunting restriction), and finally proposes a solution (remove the restriction).
Main Conclusion:
Removing the 5% hunting restriction would allow other Arctic bird species to recover from the threat posed by snow geese overpopulation.
Logical Structure:
The author assumes a direct causal chain: removing hunting restrictions → more snow geese killed → reduced snow geese population → less displacement of other species → recovery of threatened birds. The logic depends on the idea that hunting is currently the main limiting factor on snow geese population.
Prethinking:
Question type:
Weaken - We need to find information that reduces our belief in the conclusion that dropping the 5% hunting restriction would allow other Arctic bird species to recover.
Precision of Claims:
The argument makes specific claims about causation (snow geese displacing other birds), quantity (5% population reduction threshold), and predicted outcome (other species recovering if restriction is dropped).
Strategy:
To weaken this argument, we need to find scenarios that show why removing the hunting restriction might NOT lead to other bird species recovering. We should look for gaps in the logic - maybe hunting won't actually reduce snow geese enough, or maybe the problem isn't just about snow geese numbers, or maybe there are other factors preventing recovery.