In Alaska, tradition is a powerful legal concept, appearing in a wide

Question

New Project RC Butler 2019  -  Practice 2 RC Passages Everyday   
Passage # 362, Date : 30-Sep-2019
 This post is a part of New Project RC Butler 2019 .  Click here for Details

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 prevalence in statutory law, the term “tradition” is rarely defined. Instead, there seems to be a presumption that its meaning is obvious. Failure to define “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 use of sea otter pelts illustrate the problems that 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 handicrafts.” The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) subsequently issued regulations defining authentic native articles as those “commonly produced” before 1972, when the MMPA took effect. Not covered by the exemption, according to the FWS, were items 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 had also been seized. After hearing testimony establishing that Alaska Natives had made many uses of sea otters before the occupation of the territory by Russia in the late 1700s, the court reconsidered what constituted a traditional item under the statute. The court now held  that the FWS’s regulations were based on a “strained interpretation” of the word “traditional,”  and that the reference to “living memory” imposed an excessively restrictive time frame. The court stated, “The fact that Alaskan natives were prevented, by circumstances beyond their control, from exercising a tradition for a given period of time does not mean that it has been lost forever or that it has become any less a ‘tradition.’ It defies common sense to define ‘traditional’ in such a way that only those traditions that were exercised during a comparatively short period in history could qualify as ‘traditional.”   1

1. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

(A) Two cases involving the use of sea otter pelts by Alaska Natives illustrate the difficulties surrounding the application of the legal concept of tradition in Alaska.
(B) Two court decisions have challenged the notion that for an activity to be considered “traditional,” it must be shown to be a long-standing activity that has been regularly and continually practiced.
(C) Two court cases involving the use of sea otter pelts by Alaska Natives exemplify the wave of lawsuits that are now occurring in response to changes in natural-resource and public-lands regulations.
(D) Definitions of certain legal terms long taken for granted are being reviewed in light of new evidence that has come from historical sources relating to Alaska Native culture.
(E) Alaskan state laws and U.S. federal laws are being challenged by Alaska Natives because the laws are not sufficiently sensitive to indigenous peoples’ concerns.

2 
 2. The court in the 1991 case referred to the FWS’s interpretation of the term “traditional” as “strained” ( Highlighted ) because, in the court’s view, the interpretation

(A) ignored the ways in which Alaska Natives have historically understood the term “traditional”
(B) was not consonant with any dictionary definition of “traditional”
(C) was inconsistent with what the term “traditional” is normally understood to mean
(D) led the FWS to use the word “traditional” to describe a practice that should not have been
described as such
(E) failed to specify which handicrafts qualified to be designated as “traditional”

3 
 3. According to the passage, the court’s decision in the 1991 case was based on which one of the following?

(A) a narrow interpretation of the term “long-standing”
(B) a common-sense interpretation of the phrase “within living memory”
(C) strict adherence to the intent of FWS regulations
(D) a new interpretation of the Fur Seal Treaty of 1910
(E) testimony establishing certain historical facts

4 
 4. The passage most strongly suggests that the court in the 1986 case believed that “traditional” should be defined in a way that

(A) reflects a compromise between the competing concerns surrounding the issue at hand
(B) emphasizes the continuity and regularity of practices to which the term is applied
(C) reflects the term’s usage in everyday discourse
(D) encourages the term’s application to recently developed, as well as age-old, activities
(E) reflects the concerns of the people engaging in what they consider to be traditional activities

5 
 5. Which one of the following is most strongly suggested by the passage?

(A) Between 1910 and 1972, Alaska Natives were prohibited from hunting sea otters.
(B) Traditional items made from sea otter pelts were specifically mentioned in the Alaska Native exemption of the MMPA.
(C) In the late 1700s, Russian hunters pressured the Russian government to bar Alaska Natives from hunting sea otters.
(D) By 1972, the sea otter population in Alaska had returned to the levels at which it had been prior to the late 1700s.
(E) Prior to the late 1700s, sea otters were the marine animal most often hunted by Alaska Natives.

6 
 6. The author’s reference to the Fur Seal Treaty ( Highlighted ) primarily serves to

(A) establish the earliest point in time at which fur seals were considered to be on the brink of extinction
(B) indicate that several animals in addition to sea otters were covered by various regulatory exemptions issued over the years
(C) demonstrate that there is a well-known legal precedent for prohibiting the hunting of protected animals
(D) suggest that the sea otter population was imperiled by Russian seal hunters and not by Alaska Natives
(E) help explain the evolution of Alaska Natives’ legal rights with respect to handicrafts defined as “traditional”

7 
 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 a “traditional” Alaska Native handicraft?

(A) A handicraft no longer practiced but shown by archaeological evidence to have been common among indigenous peoples several millennia ago
(B) A handicraft that commonly involves taking the pelts of more than one species that has been designated as endangered
(C) A handicraft that was once common but was discontinued when herd animals necessary for its practice abandoned their local habitat due to industrial development
(D) A handicraft about which only a very few indigenous craftspeople were historically in possession of any knowledge
(E) A handicraft about which young Alaska Natives know little because, while it was once common, few elder Alaska Natives still practice it

Source:   LSAT Official PrepTest 63   ( June 2011 ) 
 Difficulty Level:   700

ShankSouljaBoi · Answer

All wrong. Please check OA's. I am lost after this passage.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

You are right all OAs were wrongly added, i have updated now.

Thanks

ShankSouljaBoi · Answer

I still doubt question 3 6 and 7

Sajjad1994 · Answer

No doubt at all, every thing is double checked and OK now.

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

Sorry for the Trouble, my bad.

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

SajjadAhmad 
What is the difficulty level of this passage ?

Sajjad1994 · Answer

This passage is of 700+ Level.

Pratheek95 · Answer

Can someone post the answers for this, Got only Q.3 and Q.4 correct

Any suggestions to improve my accuracy would also be appreciated ?

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

Love this passage really challenged me.

1. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

Most would have been stuck between and "A" and "D"

The correct answer choice is (A)

The main point of the passage can be found in the first paragraph: the courts’ failure to clearly define
the concept of “tradition” has given rise to problematic and inconsistent legal results in two legal
cases involving the use of sea otter pelts.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. It is consistent with our prephrase described
above.

Answer choice (B): This answer choice is incorrect, because the first court decision is consistent
with the interpretation of “tradition” as a long-standing activity that has been regularly and
continually practiced. Only the 1991 decision challenged that interpretation.

Answer choice (C): This answer choice contains an exaggeration: there is no evidence that a “wave
of lawsuits” are now occurring in response to changing regulations.

Answer choice (D): Even though the 1991 decision suggests that certain definitions of legal terms
are under scrutiny in light of new testimonial evidence, the scope of this answer choice is too narrow
and not reflective of the main point of the passage as a whole. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (E): There is no evidence suggesting that the laws in question are insufficiently
sensitive to indigenous peoples’ concerns: this claim is too broad and outside the scope of the
passage to be correct.

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

2. The court in the 1991 case referred to the FWS’s interpretation of the term “traditional” as “strained” (Highlighted) because, in the court’s view, the interpretation

Relevant part of passage: 
  The court stated ,  “The fact that Alaskan natives were prevented, by circumstances beyond their control, from exercising a tradition for a given period of time does not mean that it has been lost forever or that it has become any less a ‘tradition.’  It defies  common sense  to define ‘traditional’ in such a way that only those traditions that were exercised during a comparatively short period in history could qualify as ‘traditional.”

The correct answer choice is (C)

To answer this question correctly, it is important to fully understand the rationale for the court’s decision in the 1991 case, and not focus exclusively on line 46. As stated in lines 48-54, the reference to “living memory” in the statutory definition of the word “traditional” imposed an excessively restrictive time frame, which defies “common sense.”

Answer choice (A): This answer choice is attractive, but incorrect: neither the author, nor the court, directly addressed the ways in which Alaska Natives have historically understood the term “traditional.” The testimony described in lines 41-45 merely establishes a long-standing history of making articles of clothing from sea otter pelts. Since tradition is primarily a legal concept (line 1), it is a prerogative of the courts, not the Alaska Natives, to define what the term means.

Answer choice (B): The dictionary definition of “traditional” plays no role in the court’s argument.
This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. The holding outlined in lines 48-54 substantiates the claim that the statutory interpretation of the term “traditional” was “strained” because it was inconsistent with what the term is normally understood to mean (i.e. it “defies common sense”).

Answer choice (D): This is the Opposite answer. In the court’s view, the FWS interpretation was “excessively restrictive” (lines 48-49), which led the FWS to exclude a practice that should have been described as “traditional.”

Answer choice (E): The FWS clearly specified what handicrafts would qualify as “traditional” (lines 28-35). The problem, in the court’s view, is that the FWS designation excluded articles that were not produced within “living memory,” but could still qualify as “traditional.” This answer choice is
incorrect.

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

3. According to the passage, the court’s decision in the 1991 case was based on which one of the following?

Relevant part of passage:  After hearing testimony  establishing that Alaska Natives had made many uses of sea otters before the occupation of the territory by Russia in the late 1700s,  the court reconsidered  what constituted a traditional item under the statute.
The correct answer choice is (E)

The question stem refers to the court’s decision in the 1991 case, which is outlined in the last paragraph. Be careful not to confuse the various legal viewpoints expressed in the passage, and watch out for shell game answers.

Answer choice (A): This answer choice describes the commonly held viewpoint outlined in the second paragraph (lines 13-17). By contrast, the court’s decision in the 1991 case sought to expand this interpretation and apply it to certain practices that may not have been continuous or regular. This
answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (B): This is a Shell Game answer. The court’s decision was based on a commonsense interpretation of the term “traditional,” not of the phrase “within living memory” (lines 54-57).

Answer choice (C): This is the Opposite answer. The court’s decision in the 1991 case rejected the rationale for the FWS regulations, holding that they were based on a “strained interpretation” of the
word “traditional.”

Answer choice (D): The decision rendered in the 1991 case was not based on a new interpretation of the Fur Seal Treaty of 1910, which merely prohibited the hunting of sea otters. Rather, the 1991 court provided a new interpretation of the FWS regulations specifying what types of articles are
exempted from the prohibition. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice. The court’s decision in the 1991 case was rendered after the court heard testimony establishing that Alaska Natives had made many uses of sea otters before the occupation of the territory by Russia in the late 1700s (lines 41-45).

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

4. The passage most strongly suggests that the court in the 1986 case believed that “traditional” should be defined in a way that

The correct answer choice is (B)

This question stem refers to the viewpoint of the district court in the 1986 case (lines 35-38).

Given that the court upheld the FWS regulations, it is clear that the court’s definition of the term “traditional” is consistent with the statutory definition of the term.

Answer choice (A): Since the decision in the 1986 case upheld the FWS regulations, there is no evidence that it reflects a compromise between the competing concerns surrounding the issue at hand. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. The court’s decision in the 1986 case followed the statutory regulations outlined by the FWS and described in the preceding paragraph. Note that the FWS excluded items produced from sea otter pelts, because Alaska Natives had not produced such handicrafts “within living memory” (lines 31-34). Clearly, their regulations were based on the commonly held notion that “long-standing” refers to the continuity and regularity of a practice, and so was the decision of the district court in the 1986 case.

Answer choice (C): This answer choice refers more closely to the decision of the court in the 1991 case, not the 1986 case. Make sure to differentiate between the multiple viewpoints expressed in the passage.

Answer choice (D): This answer choice is incorrect, because the court’s decision in the 1986 case upheld the restrictive statutory interpretation of “traditional” as applicable only to handicrafts produced “within living memory.”

Answer choice (E): This is the Opposite answer. Given that the district court ruled against the Aleut making articles of clothing from sea otter pelts, its definition of the term “traditional” certainly did not reflect the concerns of the people engaging in what they consider to be traditional activities.

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

5. Which one of the following is  most  strongly suggested by the passage?  
 Relevant part of passage:

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 
  Initially prohibited in 1910 and was continued by MMPA.

I think it is pertinent to note that the questions states "most", so for few incorrect answer choices some support in the passage might be given, however we have to go for the strongest.

The correct answer choice is (A), Explicitly given

For this question, you need to consider which of the following five answers can be proved using the information provided in the passage. Often the most efficient approach is to review each answer choice and quickly eliminate any that cannot be proven using the information in the passage. Then
examine the remaining responses more closely.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. The Fur Seal Treaty of 1910 imposed a blanket prohibition against the hunting of sea otters, which lasted until the Marine Mammal Protection Act was passed in 1972.

Answering this question quickly and efficiently underscores the importance of notating any chronological developments in the passage. Dates are useful because they help mark the chronology of the passage, but can also be rather confusing. Make sure you are careful to match the dates given to the correct event.

Answer choice (B): The Alaska Native exemption of the MMPA allowed takings of protected animals for use in creating authentic native articles by means of “traditional native handicrafts” (lines 25-27). While it is possible that the exemption specifically mentioned traditional items made from sea otter pelts, we have no evidence to substantiate such a claim. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): A quick reference to lines 43-44 reveals that Russia occupied the Alaskan territory in the late 1700s; however, there is no evidence that Russian hunters pressured the Russian government to bar Alaska Natives from hunting sea otters. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (D): Although the Fur Seal Treaty did prohibit the hunting of sea otters, the precise change in the sea otter population levels following the ban remains unknown. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (E): The passage provides no information as to what marine animals were most commonly hunted prior to the late 1700s. This answer choice is incorrect.

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

6. The author’s reference to the Fur Seal Treaty (Highlighted) primarily serves to
 
The correct answer choice is (E)

This question asks us to examine the primary purpose for referring to the Fur Seal Treaty in line 22. Recall that the Fur Seal Treaty was mentioned in the beginning of the third paragraph, which provides the legal background for the cases described later.

Specific Reference/Purpose questions test your ability to describe not only the purpose of the element referenced in the question itself, but also its overall function in the passage.  It would be a mistake to focus only on line 22 when answering this question—make sure you understand how it relates to the rest of the passage.

Answer choice (A): Whereas the Fur Seal Treaty does establish the earliest point in time at which the hunting of sea otters was prohibited, there is no evidence to indicate that fur seals were considered to be on the brink of extinction. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (B): There is no indication that animals other than sea otters were covered by various regulatory exemptions over the years. Also, as far as we know, the Fur Seal Treaty did not contain any exemptions. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): There is no evidence suggesting that the Fur Seal Treaty is a well-known legal precedent. Even if it were, the author is not particularly interested in using a precedent to defend the prohibition against hunting of protected animals. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (D): The author never compared the threat to the sea otter population posed by Russian seal hunters vs. Alaska Natives. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice. The third paragraph serves to outline the major statutory developments relevant to Alaska Natives’ legal rights to engage in certain “traditional” practices, and prefigures the judicial decisions rendered in 1986 and 1991. Because the author refers to the Fur Seal Treaty in the same paragraph, it is reasonable to conclude that its purpose would be consistent with the purpose of the third paragraph as a whole.

hero_with_1000_faces · Answer

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 a “traditional” Alaska Native handicraft?

The correct answer choice is (C)

The court in the 1991 case held that the term “traditional” need not refer to an activity that was only exercised within living memory: “the fact that Alaskan natives were prevented, by circumstances beyond their control, from exercising a tradition for a given period of time does not mean that it has
been lost forever or that it has become any less a ‘tradition’” (lines 49-53).

This question tests your ability to apply the ruling in the 1991 case to a decision in a future case

Answer choice (A): This answer choice is attractive, but incorrect. Just because the handicraft was common among indigenous peoples several millennia ago does not mean that the handicraft would automatically qualify as “traditional.” The court’s interpretation  does not extend to all activities  that were once common, but only to activities that may have been interrupted for reasons beyond the natives’ control.

Answer choice (B): There is no reason to suspect that the court meant to define any activity that involves taking the pelts of multiple endangered species as “traditional.” This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice. Because the handicraft in question was once common, but was discontinued for reasons beyond the native’s control, the court’s ruling in the 1991 case can be used to qualify the handicraft as “traditional.”

Answer choice (D): The relative popularity of the handicraft among the indigenous craftspeople is irrelevant to determining whether it qualifies for protection as “traditional.” This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (E): The description of this handicraft suggests that its popularity among Alaska Natives is gradually diminishing. The ruling in the 1991 case provides no rationale for protecting such handicrafts as “traditional,” even if they were once common. This answer choice is incorrect.

Kanvi · Answer

SajjadAhmad,
can you please tell me why for q 5 b is not a correct option how we eliminated b

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Hello  hero_with_1000_faces

Thanks for above all explanations, I think the line numbers you have mentioned in explanations are not representative, would you please recount these?

Thanks and regards

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Why b is wrong.

(B) If sea otter pelts were specifically exempted by law, then the government would not have prosecuted people for using sea otter pelts.

auradediligodo · Answer

Hi everyone,
Took 18 minutes and got 5/7 correct. Took me 5:30 minutes to read, write down paragraphs summaries and main point.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

P1

The first paragraph presents a contrast. While the term law has a strong legal presence in Alaska, the definition of the term can lead to problems and inconsistencies in certain cases.

P2

Paragraph 2 tells us the prevalent definition of tradition:  long standing practice . This relates not only to the time factor but also on the regular and constant practice of a tradition.
As we can see this could lead to some problems in cases where a tradition was discontinued in the past and then was practiced later on.
Paragraph 2 tell us also that there are   two cases   that proved the term to be problematic

P3

Paragraph 3 gives us historical facts. Prohibition of hunting sea otters in 1910; The Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) of 1972 with an exception for making traditional items.
Subsequent regulations asked by Fish and Wildlife Service according to which items that did not belong to the classification "within a living memory" cannot be classified as traditional.

P4

Paragraph 4 talks about two cases. The first one supports the FWS ideas while the second one doubts the same. In fact it is established that the definition of a tradition based on the expression "within living memory" is too restrictive since there could be traditions (maybe forgotten) that could not be practiced because of other circumstances.

Main Point  
The main point is to discuss the evolution of the term tradition in Alaska in legal terms

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

Pre-thinking:

Main point question

Refer to main point above

(A)   Two cases involving the use of sea otter pelts by Alaska Natives illustrate the difficulties surrounding the application of the legal concept of tradition in Alaska.
 In line with pre-thinking. Hence correct

(B) Two court decisions have challenged the notion that for an activity to be considered “traditional,” it must be shown to be a long-standing activity that has been regularly and continually practiced.
 Wrong and  Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(C) Two court cases involving the use of sea otter pelts by Alaska Natives exemplify the wave of lawsuits that are now occurring in response to changes in natural-resource and public-lands 
regulations.
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(D) Definitions of certain legal terms long taken for granted are being reviewed in light of new evidence that has come from historical sources relating to Alaska Native culture.
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(E) Alaskan state laws and U.S. federal laws are being challenged by Alaska Natives because the laws are not sufficiently sensitive to indigenous peoples’ concerns.
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. The court in the 1991 case referred to the FWS’s interpretation of the term “traditional” as “strained” (Highlighted) because, in the court’s view, the interpretation

Pre-thinking:

Detail question

Let's refer to the last paragraph. It is said that the FWS definition of tradition is limited because it is too narrow and there could be traditions that are outside of the scope of this definition

(A) ignored the ways in which Alaska Natives have historically understood the term “traditional”
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(B) was not consonant with any dictionary definition of “traditional”
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(C)  was inconsistent with what the term “traditional” is normally understood to mean
 In line with pre-thinking. Hence correct

(D) led the FWS to use the word “traditional” to describe a practice that should not have been
described as such
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(E) failed to specify which handicrafts qualified to be designated as “traditional”
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. According to the passage, the court’s decision in the 1991 case was based on which one of the following?

Pre-thinking:

Detail question

Testimonies. "After hearing testimony establishing that Alaska Natives had made many ...."

(A) a narrow interpretation of the term “long-standing”
 Never mentioned. Hence incorrect

(B) a common-sense interpretation of the phrase “within living memory”
 Opposite. Hence incorrect

(C) strict adherence to the intent of FWS regulations
 Never mentioned. Hence incorrect

(D) a new interpretation of the Fur Seal Treaty of 1910
 Never mentioned. Hence incorrect

(E)   testimony establishing certain historical facts
 In line with pre-thinking. Hence correct

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. The passage most strongly suggests that the court in the 1986 case believed that “traditional” should be defined in a way that

Pre-thinking:

Inference question

Paragraph 4. The case supported the FWS principles. So any answer choice in line with FWS principles will be the correct answer choice

(A) reflects a compromise between the competing concerns surrounding the issue at hand
 out of scope. Hence incorrect

(B)   emphasizes the continuity and regularity of practices to which the term is applied
 Indeed this is what FWS thinks. Hence correct

(C) reflects the term’s usage in everyday discourse
 Out of cope. Hence incorrect

(D) encourages the term’s application to recently developed, as well as age-old, activities
 Out of scope. Hence incorrect

(E) reflects the concerns of the people engaging in what they consider to be traditional activities
 Cannot be inferred from the information given. Hence incorrect

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Which one of the following is most strongly suggested by the passage?

Pre-thinking:

Inference question

Let's analyze the answer choices

(A)   Between 1910 and 1972, Alaska Natives were prohibited from hunting sea otters.
 It is a reasonable inference since the only change in the policy of sea otters hunting came with the law in 1972. Hence correct

(B) Traditional items made from sea otter pelts were specifically mentioned in the Alaska Native exemption of the MMPA.
 We know there was a lack in details in the MMPA so this cannot be inferred.

(C) In the late 1700s, Russian hunters pressured the Russian government to bar Alaska Natives from hunting sea otters.
 Cannot be inferred from the given information. Hence incorrect

(D) By 1972, the sea otter population in Alaska had returned to the levels at which it had been prior to the late 1700s.
 Cannot be inferred from the given information. Hence incorrect

(E) Prior to the late 1700s, sea otters were the marine animal most often hunted by Alaska Natives.
 Cannot be inferred from the given information. Hence incorrect

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. The author’s reference to the Fur Seal Treaty (Highlighted) primarily serves to

Pre-thinking:

Purpose question

The purpose is to give us historical facts that help us understand the context better

(A) establish the earliest point in time at which fur seals were considered to be on the brink of extinction
 Not the purpose. Hence incorrect

(B) indicate that several animals in addition to sea otters were covered by various regulatory exemptions issued over the years
 Not the purpose. Hence incorrect

(C) demonstrate that there is a well-known legal precedent for prohibiting the hunting of protected animals
 Indeed in line with pre-thinking. Hence correct

(D) suggest that the sea otter population was imperiled by Russian seal hunters and not by Alaska Natives
 Not the purpose. Hence incorrect

(E) help explain the evolution of Alaska Natives’ legal rights with respect to handicrafts defined as “traditional”
 Not the purpose. Hence incorrect

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 a “traditional” Alaska Native handicraft?

Pre-thinking:

Inference question

So what was peculiar about this case was the re-definition of the word tradition. Since then a tradition could be also a practice that was considered as a tradition but that could not be performed because of other circumstances

(A) A handicraft no longer practiced but shown by archaeological evidence to have been common among indigenous peoples several millennia ago
 Could be considered as a tradition but the case won't help. Hence incorrect

(B) A handicraft that commonly involves taking the pelts of more than one species that has been designated as endangered
 Out of scope. Hence incorrect

(C)   A handicraft that was once common but was discontinued when herd animals necessary for its practice abandoned their local habitat due to industrial development
 In line with pre-thinking. Hence correct

(D) A handicraft about which only a very few indigenous craftspeople were historically in possession of any knowledge
 Could be considered as a tradition but the case won't help. Hence incorrect

(E) A handicraft about which young Alaska Natives know little because, while it was once common, few elder Alaska Natives still practice it
 Could be considered as a tradition but the case won't help. Hence incorrect

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is a good day to be alive, cheers!

In Alaska, tradition is a powerful legal concept, appearing in a wide

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

In Alaska, tradition is a powerful legal concept, appearing in a wide

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards