I was stuck between A and C but I went with A because I thought LSAT exam writers would hit me with the "haha screw you, we didn't define first and second". That's what I get for trying to metagame the exam.

"It concludes that one thing was caused by another although ... first thing's having the second" put me to sleep halfway through.

Just had this issue myself, couldn't ping the website as well.

I ruled out E because I forgot about the "eaten by humans" part, makes much more sense after including that.

"did not show a reduction in losses"

What an inconveniently worded question... I was too lazy to reword it in my mind. "did show a reduction in losses" would make A true, so that's why I immediately ruled out C.