Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT133 S2 Q10 Explanation

Human settlement of previously

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsParadox

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Human settlement of previously uninhabited areas tends to endanger species of wildlife. However, the Mississippi kite, a bird found on the prairies of North America, flourishes in areas that people have settled. In fact, during the five years since rapidly in towns than in rural areas.

What this question is testing

Paradox

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
10.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to explain why the Mississippi kite population does not

Answer choices

  1. Enhances the Paradox1% picked this

    Residents of prairie towns have been setting off loud firecrackers near kites' roosting spots because of the birds' habit of diving

    This should chase kites away from towns.

  2. Too Weak6% picked this

    Towns on the prairies tend to be small, with a low density of human population and large numbers

    This does not provide a benefit to kites living in towns.

  3. Applies to Both10% picked this

    Since the international migratory bird protection treaty of 1972, it has been illegal to shoot kites, and the

    An answer that applies to both cases cannot explain a difference between those cases. The treaty has been effectively enforced in both towns and rural areas.

  4. Out of Scope1% picked this

    Wildlife such as pigeons and raccoons had already adapted successfully to towns and cities long before there were towns

    Pigeons and raccoons are not relevant to the apparent paradox

  5. Correct82% picked this

    Trees are denser in towns than elsewhere on the prairie, and these denser trees provide greater protection from hail and windstorms

    Why this is right

    Greater protection from hail and windstorms for kites’ nests and eggs is definitely a benefit. This helps explain why kites are flourishing in towns compared to rural areas.

    Skill tested: Paradox · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free