Logical Reasoning

PT150 · S3 · Q6 The waters surrounding Shooter's Island

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

  • 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

The waters surrounding Shooter's Island have long been a dumping ground for ruined ships and boats, and the wreckage there has caused these waters to be exceptionally still.

Conclusion

The still waters around Shooter's Island serve as a nursery for the juveniles.

Evidence

Shooter's Island has unusually still waters, and an unusually high percentage of juvenile birds (similar overall number birds).

Evaluate

Since the author is interpreting a Curious Fact (anomalies / asymmetries), we can use our Curious Fact / Explanation template.

Curious Fact Why does Shooter's Island have such a high percentage of juvenile birds?

Author's Explanation Because of the super still waters, the local waterbirds must choose to raise their children at Shooter's.

A correct answer will deal with one of these two pressure points: 1. an Alternate Explanation for the curious fact 2. the plausibility of the Author's Explanation

As yourself, (easier hunting for food? better protection from predators? easier place to mate?)

(young waterbirds find it easier to learn to swim and fly in still waters?)

Goal

Since this is Strengthen, we either want an answer that Rules out a different reason why Shooter's has a high percentage of juveniles or Helps the author's story that "still waters make for a good nursery" sound more plausible.

The most common way to Strengthen a Curious Fact is a "No Cause, No Effect" plausibility strengthener. So here that would sound like

6.

Which one of the following, if true, provides the most support for the argument's conclusion?

  1. The ruined ships and boats

    No Impact

    The background did tell us that the wreckage is what causes the water to be so still, so this answer reveals that the water has been potentially still for decades. Does that matter? Not really. The author's story would make sense whether the waters around Shooter's Island have been still for centuries or just a handful of years.

    0% picked this

  2. The number of juvenile waterbirds

    No Impact

    Because this is saying "dramatic fluctuations do not occur", it feels like a Defender answer on Necessary Assumption. Would it Weaken the argument if dramatic fluctuations did occur? Not really. The information we're given would be interpreted as an average, and it would still mean that on average the number of birds around Shooter's is similar to that of other islands, while the percentage of juveniles is much higher. There is a classic form of wrong answer on Strengthen / Weaken: variations occurs. Fluctuations happen. Cool? No one expects identical stasis, so telling us that changes occur / things vary is very uneventful.

    5% picked this

  3. Correct

    Waterbirds use still waters as

    Why this is right

    This definitely strengthens the plausibility of the Author's Story. She was saying that these waterbirds are using the still waters around Shooter's Island as a nursery for juveniles, and this answer supports that speculation by saying that "waterbirds use still waters as nurseries for juveniles whenever possible". It's an unusual answer for Strengthen in that it strengthens so much (because of the powerful "whenever possible"), that it basically guarantees the conclusion is right.

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

    64% picked this

  4. The waters around the islands

    Too Weak

    We already knew that Shooter's Island was "exceptionally still", so telling us that other nearby islands are "less still than Shooter's" wouldn't be providing any new information. This answer just adds a little bit of oomph to the same idea: they're much less still. Okay, cool. But we were already accepting the water at Shooter's was atypically still; this isn't moving us any closer to thinking that "still water" is the reason that so many juveniles live there. Also, this answer would not strengthen nearly as much as (C), which basically proved the conclusion.

    25% picked this

  5. Waterbirds are typically much more

    Weakens

    Since we were told that Shooter's has about the same overall abundance of waterbirds as the other local areas do, this answer is making Shooter's Island sound less like a nursery. If nurseries typically have high overall bird populations, and Shooter's has an average overall bird population, then Shooter's doesn't sound like it matches the typical traits of a waterbird nursery.

    5% picked this

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