LSAT 135 – Section 1 – Question 19

LSAT 135 - Section 1 - Question 19

December 2011

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

Target time: 1:24

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
PT135 S1 Q19	+LR	Strengthen +Streng Causal Reasoning +CausR	A 19% 160 B 15% 160 C 62% 167 D 3% 157 E 2% 157	150 160 169	+Hardest	146.098 +SubsectionMedium

Last winter was mild enough to allow most bird species to forage naturally, which explains why the proportion of birds visiting feeders was much lower than usual. The mild winter also allowed many species to stay in their summer range all winter without migrating south, thereby limiting the usual attrition accompanying migration. Hence, last year’s mild winter is responsible for this year’s larger-than-usual bird population.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis

The author hypothesizes that last year’s mild winter caused this year’s larger-than-usual bird population. This is based on the fact that the mild winter allowed a higher proportion of birds to forage naturally rather than forage at a feeder. In addition, the mild winter also allowed many bird species to avoid having to migrate south during winter, which reduced typical deaths from having to migrate.

Notable Assumptions

The author assumes that there’s no other explanation for why there was a larger-than-usual bird population. The author also assumes that a higher proportion of birds forage naturally rather than by using a feeder is something that is beneficial to bird population.

Increases in bird populations sometimes occur following unusual weather patterns.

This doesn’t help establish a causal relationship between a mild winter and the larger bird population. (A) is consistent with a completely coincidental relationship between weather patterns and bird populations.

When birds do not migrate south, the mating behaviors they exhibit differ from those they exhibit when they do migrate.

Different mating behaviors have no clear relationship to increased population. In any case, the premises already show how removing the need to migrate south helps increase populations by reducing attrition. We don’t need additional support regarding this aspect of the argument.

Birds eating at feeders are more vulnerable to predators than are birds foraging naturally.

This helps establish a causal mechanism between having a lower proportion feeding at bird feeders and a larger population. By allowing a lower proportion to feed at feeders, a mild winter helped protect birds from predators.

Birds that remain in their summer range all winter often exhaust that range’s food supply before spring.

If anything, this is something negative about a mild winter. If birds that don’t migrate south often exhaust food supplies before spring, this might suggest a mild winter could make survival more difficult.

Birds sometimes visit feeders even when they are able to find sufficient food for survival by foraging naturally.

We know the mild winter allowed a lower proportion to feed at feeders. The fact that some birds might still visit feeders despite not needing to doesn’t change or add to our understanding of the premises and how they relate to the conclusion.

LSAT 135 – Section 1 – Question 19

LSAT 135 - Section 1 - Question 19

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

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 135 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Leave a Reply Cancel