Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Hard

PT17 S2 Q7 Explanation

The fishing industry cannot

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

TopicsStrengthen

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

The fishing industry cannot currently be relied upon to help the government count the seabirds killed by net fishing, since an accurate count might result in restriction of net fishing. The government should therefore institute a program under which tissue samples from the dead birds are examined to determine the amount of the industry needs to know whether the fish it catches are contaminated with toxins.

What this question is testing

Strengthen

Your task

Find the choice that makes the argument's conclusion more likely to be true.

Common trap

Answers that are consistent with the argument but add no real support, or that strengthen a claim the argument doesn't make.

Winning move

Locate the gap between evidence and conclusion, then pick the choice that closes it.

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.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens

Answer choices

  1. Irrelevant Quality4% picked this

    The seabirds that are killed by net fishing do not eat all of the species of fish caught

    Who cares whether the birds eat ALL the species of fish that get caught or only some of them? That has nothing to do with whether this Plan of testing carcasses for toxins will help the government get numbers on dead seabirds.

  2. No Impact9% picked this

    The government has not in the past sought to determine whether fish were contaminated with toxins by examining

    The government's past actions related to examining tissue samples do not address whether the fishing industry would be motivated to report dead birds now. This has no bearing on the success or failure of the program being proposed.

  3. Correct72% picked this

    The government cannot gain an accurate count of the number of seabirds killed by net fishing unless

    Why this is right

    If the government cannot gain an accurate count without the fishing industry's cooperation, this strengthens the argument by highlighting the need for the new program as a means to incentivize participation in accurate reporting. This accentuates the problem and thus intensifies the need for a solution. It rules out the possibility of alternate solutions that don't involve bribing the fishing industry to cooperate.

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

  4. Opposite Impact8% picked this

    If the government knew that fish caught by the fishing industry were contaminated by toxins, the government

    If anything, this makes it seem like this Plan would be risky for the fishing industry to cooperate with, because it could lead to the government restricting their industry.

  5. No Impact7% picked this

    If net fishing were restricted by the government, then the fishing industry would become more inclined to reveal the number of

    This hypothetical has nothing to do with the Plan. If anything it reveals an alternate plan the author could use, which would weaken.

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