Context for the two court cases ·Between 1910 and 1972, natives couldn't hunt sea otters
In 1972, a statute was passed allowing natives to hunt, but only for use in making authentic native articles by means of "traditional native handicrafts."
Second court case ·Government agency's interpretation overturned
Court heard testimony showing that before Alaska was occupied, natives had used sea otters for many things. This showed that making stuff out of sea otter pelts was "traditional." The gov agency's interpretation of "traditional" was too narrow.
Passage Style
Problem-analysis
Single position
6.
The author's reference to the ███ ████ ██████ ██████ ████████ ██ ███ █████ ██████████ █████████ ██████ ██
Question Type
Purpose in context (of word, phrase, or idea)
Structure
According to our low-res summary, the purpose of P3 as a whole is to provide context for the court cases described in P4. The main value of P3 is to tell us what the FWS’s regulations were, so that we can properly understand the court cases that follow. But the FWS’s regulations were related to the MMPA, not to the Fur Seal Treaty. So why mention the treaty, if it never comes up again? The author’s really just letting us know what the legal landscape looked like regarding animal protection before things got more complicated with the MMPA and the FWS.
The author never suggests that they were on the brink of extinction, at this point in time or any other.
b
indicate that several ███████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ██████ ████ ███████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ██████████ ██████ ████ ███ █████
Factually inaccurate. The Fur Seal Treaty doesn’t indicate anything about exemptions, because no exemptions are mentioned under that treaty. It prohibited the hunting of sea otters. That’s all we know.
c
demonstrate that there ██ █ ██████████ █████ █████████ ███ ███████████ ███ ███████ ██ █████████ ███████
The author never brings up the idea of legal precedent for prohibiting hunting. The legal issues and court cases presented in the passage are all about how “tradition” is interpreted. Differing interpretations are discussed, but none of those interpretations involve the idea of legal precedent. Since the author doesn’t bring up legal precedent in the passage, his purpose in mentioning the Fur Seal Treaty can’t be to demonstrate the existence of any precedent.
d
suggest that the ███ █████ ██████████ ███ █████████ ██ ███████ ████ ███████ ███ ███ ██ ██████ ███████
All we know about the Fur Seal Treaty is that it was enacted in 1910 and prohibited the hunting of sea otters. Nothing there suggests that the population was imperiled by some individuals and not others.
e
help explain the █████████ ██ ██████ ████████ █████ ██████ ████ ███████ ██ ███████████ ███████ ██ █████████████
The author mentions the Fur Seal Treaty to let us know what the legal landscape looked like regarding animal protection before things got more complicated for Alaska Natives’ legal rights with the MMPA and the FWS. He’s setting the stage and explaining how the legal situation changed over time.
Difficulty
67% of people who answer get this correct
This is a difficult question.
It is similar in difficulty to other questions in this passage.
CURVE
Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right
25%140
153
75%167
Analysis
Purpose in context (of word, phrase, or idea)
Structure
Law
Problem-analysis
Single position
Answer Popularity
PopularityAvg. score
a
2%
157
b
2%
156
c
28%
160
d
1%
158
e
67%
164
Question history
You don't have any history with this question.. yet!
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.