lsat-7-1-15

winsx2008

5.     Eight years ago hunting was banned in Greenfield County on the grounds that hunting endangers public safety. Now the deer population in the county is six times what it was before the ban. Deer are invading residential areas, damaging property and causing motor vehicle accidents that result in serious injury to motorists. Since there were never any hunting-related injuries in the county, clearly the ban was not only unnecessary but has created a danger to public safety that would not otherwise exist.

Which one of the following, if true, provides the strongest additional support for the conclusion above?

(A) In surrounding counties, where hunting is permitted, the size of the deer population has not increased in the last eight years.

(B) Motor vehicle accidents involving deer often result in damage to the vehicle, injury to the motorist, or both.

(C) When deer populations increase beyond optimal size, disease and malnutrition become more widespread among the deer herds.

(D) In residential areas in the county, many residents provide food and salt for deer.（A）

(E) Deer can cause extensive damage to ornamental shrubs and trees by chewing on twigs and saplings.

  a是加强。我觉得b，c，也是加强呀！？

hedonism555

in order to control deer population, the arguer assumes that hunting will be the effective means. however, one possiblity remains that even hunting is resumed, deer population will still increase. A wipes out this possibility.

b, c just show negative effect of dense deer poplulation, but fails to support the efficiency of hunting.

winsx2008

I get it , thank you.