PrepTest 144, Section 4, Question 3
The official listing of an animal species as(57 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(17 more words not shown)
- AThe process of(10 more words not shown)
- BPublic campaigns to(15 more words not shown)
- CThe number of(9 more words not shown)
- DAnimals are more(10 more words not shown)
- EPoachers find it(15 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
We give the animals more legal protection, and then their wild population falls even faster. What is getting worse despite those new safeguards?
The laws sound helpful: restrict trade and exports, and strengthen the rules against poaching. But passing a law doesn't guarantee that a species will recover. Perhaps the damage is already so severe that the population keeps collapsing even after protection arrives. That's one possibility worth investigating.
What we’re looking for
We need to explain the change in the rate, though. It isn't enough to tell us why the animals were endangered to begin with, or why some still disappear afterward. The question asks why the decline becomes faster after the species receives its official listing. Keep that before-and-after comparison in view.
Working the answers
- A
Taking years to approve a listing could delay protection. But the decline accelerates after the listing finally happens. A long administrative process doesn't itself explain that acceleration. We would still need to know what makes the situation worsen at that point.
- B
A campaign might attract more attention to a panda than to an unfamiliar snake. That tells us which species the public cares about. It doesn't tell us why a particular species starts disappearing faster after it receives legal protection.
- C
More species being listed is different from a faster decline within a listed species. The total number of listings could rise while every newly protected population recovered. C doesn't explain the pattern we were given.
- DCorrect
The listing could advertise the very feature that makes collectors want these animals: their rarity. Someone who previously had little interest might now see an animal as an unusually valuable addition to a collection. That increased demand could encourage more capture or killing, even with stronger laws in place. This gives us a new pressure that can arise when endangered status becomes official, helping explain why the wild population then falls faster.
- E
This makes animals harder for poachers to find as their population shrinks. That could hinder further poaching. It doesn't supply a reason for the faster decline; if anything, it makes that decline harder to explain through poaching.
More Paradox questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Paradox questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.