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?
A.Hunting limits for snow geese were imposed many years ago in response to a sharp decline in the population of snow geese.
B.It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date.
C.The number of snow geese taken by hunters each year has grown every year for several years.
D.As their population has increased, snow geese have recolonized wintering grounds that they had not used for several seasons.
E.In the snow goose’s winter habitats, the goose faces no significant natural predation.
选B.错选D.不是很懂...请大家帮忙指点~~谢谢~~
作者: will_kk 时间: 2007-3-17 23:40
我觉得这句话中间少了个条件
the hunting season ends...if... and when hunting has reduced the population by five percent
作者: miffycn 时间: 2007-3-18 03:15
Ｄ as 条件不对，无关
B B.It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date而other species 还是下降， 结论：dropping this restriction would allow the other species to recover.
是断桥！
是断桥！
作者: Arragon 时间: 2007-4-1 13:23
但是drop this restriction之后，导致的是其他 species增加的话，怎么是weaken呢？
我觉得没一个答案对
作者: olivetang 时间: 2007-4-3 17:34
我将题目大致翻译了一下，大家一起来讨论。
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.
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.
B 是说多年以来，猎鹅都会比官方规定的结束时间提前结束。结束的原因当然是因为对雪鹅的捕杀量已经达到，或超过了5%，所以要提前结束。 比如猎鹅从3月开始到6月结束，那么在4月时捕杀量就已经达到5%了，所以在4月猎鹅季节就被官方提前强制结束了。 提干中说如果取消5%的猎杀限制，就会使其他物种复苏，在这个例子中也就是说，如果猎鹅季节不会因为捕杀量超过5%就提前结束的话，那么在6月结束时，雪鹅的减少量必然会超过5%，所以其他鸟就可以复苏了。
所以B是加强。
不知道我说明白没有......
作者: koala2008xx 时间: 2007-8-24 01:01
大家翻译有出入啊？迷惑……
究竟该怎么解释B？正选是？
作者: qianrene 时间: 2007-10-12 14:43
以下是引用skyzhang在2007-5-16 17:45:00的发言：
B.It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date.
不过我还要细抠一下哈，呵呵。就算“禁令让狩猎季提早结束” 也是很多年前的事情了。是对的，即：放开去打猎，你们也打不到5%。但题目希望我们削弱的是“放开了打猎也不会使other species recover”对吧？你能保证打猎打不到这么多鹅就等同于鹅not increase sharply吗？
那这中间就存在一个大家对潜在前提的理解：鹅被打猎后减少了（注意是被猎杀而减少）是否就会让other species recover？
题目第一句说：Some species of Arctic birds are threatened by recent sharp increases in the population of snow geese，即sharp increases of geese是作者承认的事实，即鹅的快速繁殖会威胁其他物种。鹅繁殖多就一定等同于猎人打的数量少吗？这点说来似乎不够严谨。如果说鹅increase sharply 同时能聪明地躲开猎人或是隐藏起来（除非猎人一天24小时盯着狂杀），不会成为被猎杀的猎物，但鹅仍然会threaten over species（因为不断繁殖），那B这个答案能完美地削弱吗？
这时只好看看D了：“As their population has increased（承认了作者提出的前提，正确）, snow geese have recolonized wintering grounds that they had not used for several seasons.” 鹅自己都跑走了，不愿意留在这里过冬了，那怎么威胁其他物种呢？鹅主动选择离开，很严谨，没有给threaten留下任何可能性。
所以感觉D才是最契合题干的“most seriously undermines the argument”，即削弱“放开了打猎也不会使other species recover”。重点还是落回到“other species recover”上哦。
欢迎讨论，但请看清我的观点后再做反驳，谢谢！
[此贴子已经被作者于2007-10-12 17:43:11编辑过]
作者: qianrene 时间: 2007-10-12 18:15
MM说的好多，一时把我也看晕了
文章结论是dropping this restriction would allow the other species to recover
那么削弱的话就应该针对这个restriction会不会有效果
而D：鹅自己离开不会威胁其他物种是提出了一个他因allow other species to recover和这个restriction allow other species to recover并不矛盾呀
D不是最好的，但它很严谨，紧扣原文，只谈数量，而且让人觉得很明白：鹅们不但数量增多，而且又开辟新的“根据地”啦，——“星星之火，可以燎原”——不过，我得承认，原来我对题中“drop”的理解有些偏差，dropping this restriction ——我以为是把5%的那个限制取消，换成别的了，比如改成10%，这样理解的话，D就是正确的了。理由很简单，比如原来有1000只鹅，5%意味着只能打50只。如果现在是3000只，10%尽管可以打300只，但鹅的绝对数量还是比以前多，所以能削弱原结论。
D不是最好的，但它很严谨，紧扣原文，只谈数量，而且让人觉得很明白：鹅们不但数量增多，而且又开辟新的“根据地”啦，——“星星之火，可以燎原”——不过，我得承认，原来我对题中“drop”的理解有些偏差，dropping this restriction ——我以为是把5%的那个限制取消，换成别的了，比如改成10%，这样理解的话，D就是正确的了。理由很简单，比如原来有1000只鹅，5%意味着只能打50只。如果现在是3000只，10%尽管可以打300只，但鹅的绝对数量还是比以前多，所以能削弱原结论。
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?
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument?
B.It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date.
B.It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date.
D.As their population has increased, snow geese have recolonized wintering grounds that they had not used for several seasons.
应该是B。楼上的同学们翻译得是对的，但是要理解：其实每年雪鹅的数目都达到了规定的下降5%的额度（所以提早结束了）；但是雪鹅数目的下降并不是the other species to recover的必要充分条件；也就是说无论取消不取消额度限制，都不能肯定造成recover的结果，所以是削弱。而D里面的wintergrounds是无关项，一看就不能选。
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.
逻辑链条
recent sharp increase导致了 some species are threaten
所以为了 allow species 复苏 必须 减少 recent sharp increase
也就是找出recent sharp increase的原因
原文认为 restriction是引起 recent sharp increase的原因
那么我们只要证明restriction不是引起recent sharp increase的原因
B刚好证明了这点
这才是真正的逻辑链
逻辑链条
recent sharp increase导致了 some species are threaten
B 是说多年以来，猎鹅都会比官方规定的结束时间提前结束。结束的原因当然是因为对雪鹅的捕杀量已经达到，或超过了5%，所以要提前结束。 比如猎鹅从3月开始到6月结束，那么在4月时捕杀量就已经达到5%了，所以在4月猎鹅季节就被官方提前强制结束了。 提干中说如果取消5%的猎杀限制，就会使其他物种复苏，在这个例子中也就是说，如果猎鹅季节不会因为捕杀量超过5%就提前结束的话，那么在6月结束时，雪鹅的减少量必然会超过5%，所以其他鸟就可以复苏了。
所以B是加强。
不知道我说明白没有......
这个题目是有问题
个人觉得没有一个选项是正确的
争议在于什么原因导致狩猎季节的结束？
是猎人打到手抽筋，被禁止玩， 还是猎人根本就不想玩，导致曲终人散，提前收场？
大家的意思呢？
作者: hansomecd 时间: 2008-5-5 20:05
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?
A.Hunting limits for snow geese were imposed many years ago in response to a sharp decline in the population of snow geese.
B.It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date.
C.The number of snow geese taken by hunters each year has grown every year for several years.
D.As their population has increased, snow geese have recolonized wintering grounds that they had not used for several seasons.
E.In the snow goose’s winter habitats, the goose faces no significant natural predation.
B 的翻译到底
是1）距离上次因为限制而提早结束打猎季节已经过去很多年了（现在不会因为限制而提早结束）
还是2）因为限制而提早结束打猎季节已经很多年了（每年都很快打到5%）
[此贴子已经被作者于2008-5-6 1:04:36编辑过]
作者: redhead 时间: 2008-5-6 17:43
以下是引用bigmachine在2007-6-26 21:19:00的发言：
B 是说多年以来，猎鹅都会比官方规定的结束时间提前结束。结束的原因当然是因为对雪鹅的捕杀量已经达到，或超过了5%，所以要提前结束。 比如猎鹅从3月开始到6月结束，那么在4月时捕杀量就已经达到5%了，所以在4月猎鹅季节就被官方提前强制结束了。 提干中说如果取消5%的猎杀限制，就会使其他物种复苏，在这个例子中也就是说，如果猎鹅季节不会因为捕杀量超过5%就提前结束的话，那么在6月结束时，雪鹅的减少量必然会超过5%，所以其他鸟就可以复苏了。
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.
逻辑链条
recent sharp increase导致了 some species are threaten
所以为了 allow species 复苏 必须 减少 recent sharp increase
也就是找出recent sharp increase的原因
原文认为 restriction是引起 recent sharp increase的原因
那么我们只要证明restriction不是引起recent sharp increase的原因
B刚好证明了这点
这才是真正的逻辑链
逻辑链条
recent sharp increase导致了 some species are threaten
所以为了 allow species 复苏 必须 减少 recent sharp increase
也就是找出recent sharp increase的原因
原文认为 restriction是引起 recent sharp increase的原因
那么我们只要证明restriction不是引起recent sharp increase的原因
B刚好证明了这点
这才是真正的逻辑链
逻辑链条
recent sharp increase导致了 some species are threaten
所以为了 allow species 复苏 必须 减少 recent sharp increase
也就是找出recent sharp increase的原因
原文认为 restriction是引起 recent sharp increase的原因
那么我们只要证明restriction不是引起recent sharp increase的原因
B刚好证明了这点
这才是真正的逻辑链
个人认为说的很明了。
作者: linuxzh 时间: 2008-11-15 22:33
其实这到题有一个非常简单的做法.
Clearly, dropping this restriction would allow the other species to recover.
我们看答案相关的描述里面只有 B 出现了 this restriction
所以直接选 B 了.
对付逻辑体,很使用的方法吧作者: candy8307 时间: 2008-12-2 03:46
i think you misunderstood the explaination of B.
B says the restriction led to the hunting season closed earlier. in other words, it is very easy for people to hunt geese to reach 5%, thus the hunting season should closed as long as the restriction be reached.
不知道大家有没有注意，雪鹅威胁其他总类的北极鸟是因为它们在北极繁殖which breed in the Arctic and are displacing birds of less vigorous species，打猎的行为是发生在southern regions where they winter，使威胁减小（recover)的方法是减少它们在北极breed的数量，只有总体数量减少了，去北极breed的数量才会减少。而D，是关于雪鹅在南部地区过冬的栖息地的问题，是无关项。只有说明取消限令能否进一步促进减少总体数量才是问题的核心。至于因为栖息地改变，猎人就不能打到雪鹅的假设应该有些牵强了……
作者: helenacd 时间: 2009-3-7 04:30
thanks作者: beryl_con 时间: 2009-3-27 16:34
这么多选b的人说的话我看下来每一个有说服力的，不知道相关的逻辑链在哪里，难道我理解有问题，虽然我觉得d也很牵强，但好像比b要有道理作者: 34cocorate 时间: 2009-5-3 22:52
清楚了 直接否定因素 作者: soul86 时间: 2009-6-6 10:50 Clearly, dropping this restriction would allow the other species to recover.
注意一下原文结论特意说other species recover而不是Arctic bird recover
D 选项，snow geese 转移到其他地方，虽然不会对Arctic bird构成威胁，但对other species可能会有威胁
D不是最好的，但它很严谨，紧扣原文，只谈数量，而且让人觉得很明白：鹅们不但数量增多，而且又开辟新的“根据地”啦，——“星星之火，可以燎原”——不过，我得承认，原来我对题中“drop”的理解有些偏差，dropping this restriction ——我以为是把5%的那个限制取消，换成别的了，比如改成10%，这样理解的话，D就是正确的了。理由很简单，比如原来有1000只鹅，5%意味着只能打50只。如果现在是3000只，10%尽管可以打300只，但鹅的绝对数量还是比以前多，所以能削弱原结论。
D不是最好的，但它很严谨，紧扣原文，只谈数量，而且让人觉得很明白：鹅们不但数量增多，而且又开辟新的“根据地”啦，——“星星之火，可以燎原”——不过，我得承认，原来我对题中“drop”的理解有些偏差，dropping this restriction ——我以为是把5%的那个限制取消，换成别的了，比如改成10%，这样理解的话，D就是正确的了。理由很简单，比如原来有1000只鹅，5%意味着只能打50只。如果现在是3000只，10%尽管可以打300只，但鹅的绝对数量还是比以前多，所以能削弱原结论。
D不是最好的，但它很严谨，紧扣原文，只谈数量，而且让人觉得很明白：鹅们不但数量增多，而且又开辟新的“根据地”啦，——“星星之火，可以燎原”——不过，我得承认，原来我对题中“drop”的理解有些偏差，dropping this restriction ——我以为是把5%的那个限制取消，换成别的了，比如改成10%，这样理解的话，D就是正确的了。理由很简单，比如原来有1000只鹅，5%意味着只能打50只。如果现在是3000只，10%尽管可以打300只，但鹅的绝对数量还是比以前多，所以能削弱原结论。
B.It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date.
仔细理解一下这句话。
It has been many years since i visited Paris
就是说我参观巴黎是很久之前的事情了。
所以，这里说的是：“禁令让狩猎季提早结束” 也是很多年前的事情了。
就是说现在已经不可能提早结束了。
就是说我现在放开让你们去打猎，你们也打不到5%。
根据原文 the hunting season ends if and when hunting has reduced the population by five percent, 也就是说(B)It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date中的hunting season closed earlier不是由于猎人打不到5%，相反是太容易打到那5%了，所以hunting season才会更早结束（而且多年都是这样）。
根据原文 the hunting season ends if and when hunting has reduced the population by five percent, 也就是说(B)It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date中的hunting season closed earlier不是由于猎人打不到5%，相反是太容易打到那5%了，所以hunting season才会更早结束（而且多年都是这样）。
Dropping是放弃，文章结论是说放弃限制，就是可以继续hunt snow geese，减少SG的数量会让被SG威胁的other species recover。问削弱，就是说不能让other recover。
It has been many years since是很久以前的意思。It has been many years since I went to Paris. 很久以前我曾经去过巴黎，已经是历史了。B说，现在已经不会出现这种情况了：由于限制的原因导致hunting提前结束。就是说hunting不会因为限制的原因提前结束，而提前结束是因为SG数量减少了5%，所以说hunting不会使得SG数量减少5%à人们不喜欢打猎SG了。 所以人们不喜欢打猎SG，即使放开限制，可以多多的捕杀SG，SG的数量不会下降，other species也因此不会recover，削弱。
这里的关键在于对scheduled date的理解，我认为scheduled date = when hunting has reduced the population by five percent，即scheduled date=5%，因为题目中用的是if and when，而不是if or when，所以官方有且只有一个标准，就是到5%。而hunting season应该是指“捕猎旺季”，这个没有官方规定，只是由人们兴趣所定，比如天气、假期或者捕猎兴趣。
这样，B应该理解为：禁令使得捕猎旺季在没有达到官方禁猎时间（scheduled date = when hunting has reduced the population by five percent）前就提前结束，这种情况已经有很多年了。 捕猎旺季提前结束，言外之意就是禁令使得人们捕猎欲望降低了，现在的实际情况是每年那个鹅被干掉的数量都不到5%（所以才有increase的可能，如果每年都被干掉5%，即X(1-5%)^n，这个鹅的数量不太会增加，不减少就是好事）
我将题目大致翻译了一下，大家一起来讨论。 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. 1）一些在极地生活的鸟类受到了雪鹅数量急剧增加的威胁。2）这些雪鹅又是捕猎者所喜爱的猎物。3）捕猎禁令规定了每当官方估计雪鹅数量减少了5%当年的捕猎就必须结束。4）所以，作者认为取消5%的限令将有助于其他鸟类的生存（因为雪鹅数量会因为不受限制的捕猎而减少）
B. It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date. 多年来，对雪鹅的狩猎季节总是要比预期的提前结束。 也就是说捕猎的人们其实对雪鹅不是特别感兴趣，在雪鹅数量没有减少5%前，狩猎者们就停止捕猎了。所以，即使取消禁令，也不会使雪鹅的数量下降。 欢迎讨论。
B. It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date. 多年来，对雪鹅的狩猎季节总是要比预期的提前结束。 也就是说捕猎的人们其实对雪鹅不是特别感兴趣，在雪鹅数量没有减少5%前，狩猎者们就停止捕猎了。所以，即使取消禁令，也不会使雪鹅的数量下降。 欢迎讨论。
B. It has been many years since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date.
仔细理解一下这句话。 It has been many years since i visited Paris 就是说我参观巴黎是很久之前的事情了。 所以，这里说的是：“禁令让狩猎季提早结束” 也是很多年前的事情了。 就是说现在已经不可能提早结束了。 就是说我现在放开让你们去打猎，你们也打不到5%。
[此贴子已经被作者于2007-5-16 17:45:19编辑过]
-- by 会员 skyzhang (2007/5/16 17:45:00)
作者: victorbj262 时间: 2010-2-24 20:13
此题我选D。 大家都没注意到下面话中的“in the soughern regions" "snow geese are a popular quarry for hunters in the southern regions where they winter"
这里的关键在于对scheduled date的理解，我认为scheduled date = when hunting has reduced the population by five percent，即scheduled date=5%，因为题目中用的是if and when，而不是if or when，所以官方有且只有一个标准，就是到5%。而hunting season应该是指“捕猎旺季”，这个没有官方规定，只是由人们兴趣所定，比如天气、假期或者捕猎兴趣。
这样，B应该理解为：禁令使得捕猎旺季在没有达到官方禁猎时间（scheduled date = when hunting has reduced the population by five percent）前就提前结束，这种情况已经有很多年了。 捕猎旺季提前结束，言外之意就是禁令使得人们捕猎欲望降低了，现在的实际情况是每年那个鹅被干掉的数量都不到5%（所以才有increase的可能，如果每年都被干掉5%，即X(1-5%)^n，这个鹅的数量不太会增加，不减少就是好事）
Dropping是放弃，文章结论是说放弃限制，就是可以继续hunt snow geese，减少SG的数量会让被SG威胁的other species recover。问削弱，就是说不能让other recover。
It has been many years since是很久以前的意思。It has been many years since I went to Paris. 很久以前我曾经去过巴黎，已经是历史了。B说，现在已经不会出现这种情况了：由于限制的原因导致hunting提前结束。就是说hunting不会因为限制的原因提前结束，而提前结束是因为SG数量减少了5%，所以说hunting不会使得SG数量减少5%à人们不喜欢打猎SG了。 所以人们不喜欢打猎SG，即使放开限制，可以多多的捕杀SG，SG的数量不会下降，other species也因此不会recover，削弱。
注意文中的这句话 in the southern regions where they winter （这句话就是说明雪鹅来南方过冬 过完就飞回北极 ）
其实考试时不可能有这么复杂的分析思路 一上来排除ACE（较简单的） 发现D选项要加条件且和restriction没有什么联系，于是D为迷惑选项 踢掉。剩B你管它什么意思 选上 时间就是金钱 商战中不是所有东西都确定了才做决定的 有五个方案 剔除四个差的 留下较好的就行了。这就是GMAT要锻炼我们的东西（不要去纠结于为什么It has been many years since是很久以前的意思我没理解对）作者: janelee19 时间: 2011-2-8 07:51
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.
逻辑链条 recent sharp increase导致了 some species are threaten 所以为了 allow species 复苏 必须 减少 recent sharp increase 也就是找出recent sharp increase的原因 原文认为 restriction是引起 recent sharp increase的原因 那么我们只要证明restriction不是引起recent sharp increase的原因 B刚好证明了这点 这才是真正的逻辑链
逻辑链条 recent sharp increase导致了 some species are threaten 所以为了 allow species 复苏 必须 减少 recent sharp increase 也就是找出recent sharp increase的原因 原文认为 restriction是引起 recent sharp increase的原因 那么我们只要证明restriction不是引起recent sharp increase的原因 B刚好证明了这点 这才是真正的逻辑链
D选项说的是geese数量增加后，又去开辟了新的根据地这件事，而原文是在讨论geese增加对other species的影响，我认为D形不成什么strengthen or weaken.
-- by 会员 highdior (2008/9/15 18:05:00)
It's not that hunters are not into hunting the geese-->"Although snow geese are a popular quarry for hunters", it's just that hunters cannot hunt enough geese (5%). And that's why hunting season has to be extended after the scheduled date. This is to say that hunters simply cannot hunt enough geese (technology, or geese are hard to catch). So even without the restriction, hunters cannot hunt that many geese, thereby not being able to counter the sharp increase in the geese populations.
作者: atobe1989 时间: 2011-10-20 19:53
B 是说多年以来，猎鹅都会比官方规定的结束时间提前结束。结束的原因当然是因为对雪鹅的捕杀量已经达到，或超过了5%，所以要提前结束。 比如猎鹅从3月开始到6月结束，那么在4月时捕杀量就已经达到5%了，所以在4月猎鹅季节就被官方提前强制结束了。 提干中说如果取消5%的猎杀限制，就会使其他物种复苏，在这个例子中也就是说，如果猎鹅季节不会因为捕杀量超过5%就提前结束的话，那么在6月结束时，雪鹅的减少量必然会超过5%，所以其他鸟就可以复苏了。 所以B是加强。 不知道我说明白没有......
-- by 会员 bigmachine (2007/6/26 21:19:00)
Agree. then why the correct answer is B?作者: 昵昵大人 时间: 2011-11-19 13:33
其实考试时不可能有这么复杂的分析思路 一上来排除ACE（较简单的） 发现D选项要加条件且和restriction没有什么联系，于是D为迷惑选项 踢掉。剩B你管它什么意思 选上 时间就是金钱 商战中不是所有东西都确定了才做决定的 有五个方案 剔除四个差的 留下较好的就行了。这就是GMAT要锻炼我们的东西（不要去纠结于为什么It has been many years since是很久以前的意思我没理解对）
-- by 会员 xiaodangzai (2010/12/2 16:50:58)
顶这个！ A support argument C support too D irrelevant E ireelevant too
so answer is B ：P作者: bay881024 时间: 2012-7-1 19:33
个人认为：D说鹅数量急剧增加所以又去开辟新的过冬地了，但：1.没有给出任何增加原因与restriction的关系，2.即使有一部分鹅去新的地方过冬，留下来的数量也许对比题目中给的recently的时间还是要多，所以并不是说有部分鹅去别的地方过冬就意味着本地的鹅有所减少，所以也就更加不能进一步削弱原文结论。
对付逻辑体,很使用的方法吧
），老农增产又增收，积压了老多粮食，自己吃不完，卖也卖不出去，但也不能眼瞅这粮食坏掉啊，于是乎老农想到了已经挨饿多年的那条可怜的大狗。心想：这次让他吃个够，这样我的粮食就不会被浪费了。
中文题编的很好，浅显易懂，很能说明问题。