LSAT 104 – Section 4 – Question 06

LSAT 104 - Section 4 - Question 06

December 1998

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:14

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT104 S4 Q06
+LR
Evaluate +Eval
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
3%
163
B
2%
165
C
10%
164
D
6%
160
E
79%
169
141
153
164
 +Harder 147.438 +SubsectionMedium

Monarch butterflies spend the winter hibernating on trees in certain forests. Local environmental groups have organized tours of the forests in an effort to protect the butterflies’ habitat against woodcutters. Unfortunately, the tourists trample most of the small shrubs that are necessary to the survival of any monarch butterflies that fall off the trees. Therefore, the tour groups themselves are endangering the monarch butterfly population.

Summarize Argument

The author concludes that tour groups meant to protect butterfly habitats are actually harming the monarch butterfly population. She supports this by saying that the tourists damage most small shrubs, which are essential for the survival of butterflies that fall from the trees.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes that tourists destroying the shrubs is enough to threaten the entire monarch population. To make this assumption, she must also believe that the monarchs that fall from the trees make up a significant portion of the entire population, so that, by endangering the subset of monarchs that fall off the trees, the tourists also endanger the population as a whole.

A
the amount of forest land suitable for monarch butterfly hibernation that is not currently used by monarch butterflies for hibernation

The author only discusses the effects of tourists on the land that is currently being used by monarchs for hibernation. Whether there is also some other land that could be used for hibernation isn’t relevant to her argument.

B
the amount of wood cut each year by woodcutters in forests used by monarch butterflies for hibernation

The author concludes that the tourists are endangering the monarch butterfly population by trampling shrubs. Whether or not the woodcutters are also threatening the butterfly population doesn’t help us to evaluate this argument.

C
the amount of plant life trampled by the tourists that is not necessary to the survival of monarch butterflies

The author is only concerned with the plant life, specifically the small shrubs, that is necessary to the monarchs’ survival. It doesn’t matter how much other plant life is trampled by the tourists.

D
the proportion of the trees cut down by the woodcutters each year that are cut in the forests used by monarch butterflies for hibernation

Like (B), this doesn’t help us evaluate the author’s argument because her conclusion is only about the effect of the tourists on butterfly survival. The effect of the woodcutters is irrelevant.

E
the proportion of hibernating monarch butterflies that fall off the trees

If only a small number of hibernating monarchs fall from the trees, the tourists' actions would have little impact on the population as a whole. However, if a large number fall, the tourists may indeed be endangering the entire monarch butterfly population.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 104 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply