First I don't understand the stimulus at all! What is the relation between the government and the fishing industry? What is the aim of the experiment? Has the government anything to do with the experiment if the experiment is used solely by the fishing industry?
#8 - The fishing industry cannot currently be relied upon to
The government wants the fishers to help them count seabirds killed by net fishing. The "experiment" (proposed program) is to get a toxin count from tissue samples of dead birds. I'm not sure about your last question, since the gov't wants the fishers to operate the program to help the gov't.
Hope that helps,
This is the question that has been confusing me for quite a long time. I simply cannot understand the relationship between the fishing industry and the local government. What is the goal of this experiment? Who will protect the birds? Who is protecting the fish? This is very confusing. Could you please help me understand the question stem please?
If this question is from the stimulus starting, "The fishing industry cannot currently be relied upon to help the government count the seabirds killed by net fishing" (and it is often good to quote some of the stimulus so we know exactly what you're talking about), then, to paraphrase the stimulus: The government wants to know how many seabirds are killed by net fishing. So, to get the fishing industry to turn in the dead birds, the experimental program examines tissue samples from the dead birds to see the amount of toxins in the fish eaten by the birds. So the industry'll have a reason to turn in the dead birds, since the fishers want to know if fish are contaminated with toxins.
So, the fishers get something (knowledge about contaminated fish), and the government gets a count of dead birds. Everybody gets something. Makes sense?
Hope that helps,
Yeah that's awesome! Thanks!
Does "B" weaken by showing the program wouldn't last very long?
From my understanding, (B) weakens the argument because (B) shows that the fishing industry won't turn in more than needed bird carcasses, hence the gov't won't get an accurate/enough count of dead birds. Is my reasoning correct?
oli and T,
Answer choice (B) weakens the argument because it provides a reason why the count would not be accurate. The government wants an accurate count. The proposed plan is trying to align the self-interest of the industry with that of the government - if the industry will gain the benefit of toxin testing by turning in seabirds, they'll have a motivation to turn in seabirds, giving the government the information about seabird numbers killed. That theoretical benefit breaks down when you consider that the industry may not have to submit all seabirds killed to get the information about toxins they want from the government. Imagine the industry kills 10 seabirds per day per fishing net. The industry wants to know if these seabirds are contaminated with toxins because if they are, it's likely the fish caught are as well. So the industry gives the government some of the seabirds. Let's say they give 2 birds per day per fishing net. That might satisfy the industry's curiosity about contamination, but it won't provide the government the accurate count (since 8 out of 10 birds are not being turned in). That's how answer choice (B) weakens.
Basically, its a loop hole for the industry, they get what they want (to know if there is potentially toxins in their catch from seabirds) and make it appear as if they are complying with the government proposed regulation but they can skirt the proposed regulation by misleading the government to think they are getting reliable data (reporting that less seabirds were caught in their nets than actually were).
Is that a lay understanding of how that weakens why the count could not be accurate?
Hi T.B. Justin,
I don't completely follow your explanation, but it looks like you are on the right track. We can test answer choice B by treating it as true and evaluating how it affects the argument. The government wants an accurate count, but B says the industry could find out what they want by turning in only a few birds. The fishing industry still has the same incentive to misreport that caused the original problem.
I hope this helps!