Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT133 S4 P1 Q7 Explanation

Tradition and the Law

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsApplicationLaw

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

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.

Passage

In Alaska, tradition is a powerful legal concept, appearing in a wide variety of legal contexts relating to natural-resource and public-lands activities. Both state and federal laws in the United States assign privileges and exemptions to individuals engaged in “traditional” activities using otherwise off-limits land and resources. But in spite of its “tradition” clearly in written law has given rise to problematic and inconsistent legal results.

One of the most prevalent ideas associated with the term “tradition” in the law is that tradition is based on long-standing practice, where “long-standing” refers not only to the passage of time but also to the continuity and regularity of a practice. But two recent court cases involving indigenous can arise in the application of this sense of “traditional.”

The hunting of sea otters was initially prohibited by the Fur Seal Treaty of 1910. The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) of 1972 continued the prohibition, but it also included an Alaska Native exemption, which allowed takings of protected animals for use in creating authentic native articles by means of “traditional native produced from sea otter pelts, because Alaska Natives had not produced such handicrafts “within living memory.”

In 1986, FWS agents seized articles of clothing made from sea otter pelts from Marina Katelnikoff, an Aleut. She sued, but the district court upheld the FWS regulations. Then in 1991 Katelnikoff joined a similar suit brought by Boyd Dickinson, a Tlingit from whom articles of clothing made from sea otter pelts those traditions that were exercised during a comparatively short period in history could qualify as ‘traditional.’”

What this question is testing

Application

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

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

The question
7.

The ruling in the 1991 case would be most relevant as a precedent for deciding in a future case that which one of the following is

Answer choices

  1. Too Distant18% picked this

    A handicraft no longer practiced but shown by archaeological evidence to have been common among indigenous

    This doesn't seem like a "pause button" on an otherwise ongoing tradition. It sounds like several thousand years ago this thing was made, but it's not any more.

  2. Unclear Impact3% picked this

    A handicraft that commonly involves taking the pelts of more than one species that has

    We have no idea if this is a longstanding tradition or not. We don't know if any part of this activity was ever against the law. So it's hard to gauge whether it would be relevant at all to the 1991 precedent. It seems like they're trying to trap people who will pick it just because it says "pelts".

  3. Correct66% picked this

    A handicraft that was once common but was discontinued when herd animals necessary for its practice abandoned their local

    Why this is right

    This checks our first two boxes: 1. longstanding (was once common) 2. paused by forces beyond control (discontinued when industrial development caused some required animals to leave the area)

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

  4. No Pause-Button3% picked this

    A handicraft about which only a very few indigenous craftspeople were historically in possession

    This sounds like it has a longstanding career, although the fact that it was only known about by a very few craftspeople makes it seem like it wasn't super common among this society. But more importantly there's no pause-button on the tradition, due to forces out of the society's control.

  5. No Pause-Button10% picked this

    A handicraft about which young Alaska Natives know little because, while it was once common, few elder

    This answer also seems to be discussing a craft with a deep past, but we don't have a match for an externally imposed pause-button. It seems like it could be that few elders still practice this because the tradition has just died out.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

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

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