LSAT 133 – Section 1 – Question 08

LSAT 133 - Section 1 - Question 08

June 2011

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

Target time: 1:15

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
PT133 S1 Q08
+LR
Main conclusion or main point +MC
A
3%
153
B
2%
157
C
0%
150
D
12%
158
E
82%
164
140
148
157
 +Medium 146.357 +SubsectionMedium

Letter to the editor: Your article was unjustified in criticizing environmentalists for claiming that more wolves on Vancouver Island are killed by hunters than are born each year. You stated that this claim was disproven by recent studies that indicate that the total number of wolves on Vancouver Island has remained roughly constant for 20 years. But you failed to account for the fact that, fearing the extinction of this wolf population, environmentalists have been introducing new wolves into the Vancouver Island wolf population for 20 years.

Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The letter to the editor supports environmentalists after an article criticized their claims, calling that article’s criticism unjustified. The author claims the environmentalists were correct in claiming that that more wolves on Vancouver Island are killed by hunters than are born annually, even though the population has stayed constant. The reason the criticism is unjustified is because it does not recognize that environmentalists have been introducing new wolves over the past 20 years. (This would make population constancy an inaccurate representation of birth rates.)

Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s evaluation of the article’s claims: “Your article was unjustified in criticizing environmentalists for claiming that more wolves on Vancouver Island are killed by hunters than are born each year.”

A
Environmentalists have been successfully maintaining the wolf population on Vancouver Island for 20 years.
This is evidence that shows why the wolf population remains constant. The author presents this explanation to show that the environmentalists’ claims about birth and hunting rates could still be accurate.
B
As many wolves on Vancouver Island are killed by hunters as are born each year.
This is the claim discussed in the context. The editor criticizes it, and the author concludes that the criticism of the claim is unjustified.
C
The population of wolves on Vancouver Island should be maintained by either reducing the number killed by hunters each year or introducing new wolves into the population.
The stimulus does not conclude how the wolf population should be maintained. It uses how it is currently being maintained as evidence for the conclusion, which centers on the justification of criticism.
D
The recent studies indicating that the total number of wolves on Vancouver Island has remained roughly constant for 20 years were flawed.
This is inaccurate. The author does not claim that the studies that show the population remaining constant are flawed. The author accepts and presents an explanation for these results.
E
The stability in the size of the Vancouver Island wolf population does not warrant the article’s criticism of the environmentalists’ claim.
This accurately paraphrases the conclusion. The article’s criticism of the environmentalists’ claim - which relies on the stability of the wolf population as evidence - is not justified.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 133 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply