medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
The number of people visiting national parks has doubled in the last five years. During the same period, the number of wildlife sightings reported by visitors has stayed exactly the same. A commentator concluded that wildlife populations in the parks are in a state of rapid decline.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy described above?
- A new digital reporting system introduced three years ago made it far easier and quicker for ordinary park visitors to submit wildlife sightings
- Wildlife populations in the region's national parks naturally swing quite widely up and down over repeated five-year and ten-year cycles
- Heavier foot traffic and noise have driven the animals away from the busy trails into remote backcountry that visitors rarely reach.
- Most park visitors come primarily for the scenery and photographs rather than to search patiently for hard-to-spot wildlife along the trails
- Park rangers conducting their own field counts insist that the commentator's conclusion of a rapid wildlife decline is simply mistaken
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ