PrepTest 152, Section 2, Question 13
Shelton: The recent sharp decline in the number(63 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(14 more words not shown)
- AThe region with(22 more words not shown)
- BThe region with(22 more words not shown)
- CWolf packs in(29 more words not shown)
- DThere is a(24 more words not shown)
- EMoose require a(19 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Maybe the parasite can't survive in the neighboring region.
That would let both speakers be right. Shelton's first claim might initially suggest competition for food, but the passage rules that out. The proposed problem is a parasite carried by deer, which can spread to moose living nearby.
What we’re looking for
Russo's comparison raises a fair question: if the deer increase is responsible, why didn't the neighboring region lose moose too? We're asked to resolve that apparent conflict. The possibility that the parasite can't survive next door would preserve both population patterns: more deer could cause harm in one region without causing it in the other.
Working the answers
- A
Having more moose even after a decline doesn't explain the decline. A large population can fall while a smaller one stays stable. The regions' sizes and remaining totals don't tell us why the deer increase had different apparent effects.
- B
Better habitat in the region losing moose doesn't explain why that population declined while the population in poorer habitat held steady. Habitat quality might matter, but the answer doesn't connect the difference to the parasite's effect. Nor should we assume good habitat guarantees growth; we simply haven't resolved the reported contrast.
- C
A difference in wolf prey could invite a separate explanation of the moose decline. But it doesn't show how Shelton's proposed deer-and-parasite cause can operate in one region while the comparable deer increase leaves the neighboring moose stable. It gives us a possible new issue without supplying the link that reconciles these statements.
- DCorrect
This takes a more specific route than my guess about the parasite surviving: the animals' ranges overlap substantially in the declining region, but not in the neighboring region. The parasite can transfer to moose living nearby, so that difference in proximity matters.
Where the two populations overlap, more deer can create more opportunities for exposure. In the neighboring region, the lack of a large overlap limits that route. We don't have to claim the animals never meet or that no infection ever occurs there. Less opportunity for transmission helps explain why a deer increase need not cause the same population decline.
- E
Different preferences about human settlement don't tell us what either region is like. We aren't given a contrast in settlement or a change that would explain these population trends. The answer would need that connection before it could resolve the puzzle.
More Paradox questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Paradox questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.