to the top

#15 - To reduce the mosquito population in a resort area

Administrator
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 6670
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:19 pm
Points: 3,343

Complete Question Explanation

Resolve the Paradox. The correct answer choice is (C)

This author tells the story of a resort area’s plan to eliminate its mosquito problem, by attracting birds with hundreds of fruit-bearing trees. The trees grew and did attract birds, according to plan, and the birds ate a lot of mosquitoes, but the area’s mosquito problem has somehow gotten worse.

The question that follows is a Resolve the Paradox question, so the correct answer choice will resolve the apparent discrepancy between the effective plan to draw mosquito-eating birds, and the unforeseen consequence of worsening the mosquito problem in the area. The right answer will provide a reason why the mosquito population would increase, even as mosquito-eating birds continue to move to the area.

Answer choice (A): If, as this choice provides, the majority of the birds that moved to the area didn’t eat mosquitoes, that still would have left the other birds, and the stimulus specifies that the birds did eat a lot of mosquitoes. Since this answer fails to explain why the approach taken would actually exacerbate the issue, it does not resolve the paradox presented in the stimulus and should be ruled out of contention.

Answer choice (B): Even if the best represented species of birds did not eat mosquitoes, some of the other species must have been the ones that the author provides ate a lot of the mosquitoes. This does not explain the unexpected result of a worsening mosquito problem, so it cannot be the right answer to this Resolve the Paradox question.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. If, as this choice provides, the birds that were brought in got rid of more mosquito-predators than mosquitoes, that would explain how the net result would be an increase in the mosquitoes in the area.

Answer choice (D): If, as this choice provides, the weather has been dryer, which tends to keep mosquito populations down, this would expand the paradox, making it that much more surprising that the mosquito problem has gotten worse during that period.

Answer choice (E): A cyclical pattern does not explain how planting the trees, which should have drawn mosquito-eating birds, somehow actually worsened the issue, so this is not the right answer to this Resolve question.
SherryZ
LSAT Master
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 2:14 pm
Points: 0

Thank you for answering the question in advance! :)

June 2013 LSAT Sec 1 LR, Q15:

I was hesitating b/t choice A and B, I picked B finally. However, the correct choice is C!! :(

When I read the last sentence of the stimulus "However, the planting of the fruit trees had the very opposite of its intended effect", I thought it means that the amount of mosquitoes does not decrease. So my pre-prahse is the variety of bird species attracted by the fruits of trees do not eat mosquitoes (maybe they only eat those fruits??). This thought led me to choose b/t A and B :(

BTW, does "the very opposite effect" mean "the amount of mosquitoes INCREASE" rather than "the amount of mosquitoes DOES NOT DECREASE"?

Thank you so much for helping me!


Sincerely,
Sherry
Steve Stein
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 1168
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 4:33 pm
Points: 1,249

This author tells the story of a resort area’s plan to eliminate its mosquito problem, by attracting birds with hundreds of fruit-bearing trees. The trees grew and did attract birds, according to plan, and the birds ate a lot of mosquitoes, but the area’s mosquito problem has somehow gotten worse.

Since this is a Resolve question, the right answer must provide a reason why the mosquito population would increase, even as mosquito-eating birds continue to move to the area.

(A) provides that the majority of the birds that moved to the area didn’t eat mosquitoes--but that still would have left the other birds, and the stimulus specifies that the birds did eat a lot of mosquitoes. Since this answer fails to explain why the approach taken would actually exacerbate the issue, it does not resolve the paradox presented in the stimulus and should be ruled out of contention.

(B) provides that the best represented species of birds did not eat mosquitoes...that means that some of the other species must have been the ones that the author said ate a lot of the mosquitoes.

However, If, as this (C) provides, the birds that were brought in got rid of more mosquito-predators than mosquitoes, that would explain how the net result would be an increase in the mosquitoes in the area.

I hope that's helpful! Please let me know whether this is clear--thanks!

~Steve
Steve Stein
PowerScore Test Preparation
SherryZ
LSAT Master
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 2:14 pm
Points: 0

Dear Steve,

You explanation of this question is very clear. Thank you so much for your help!


Kindest regards,
Sherry