The extent of a nation’s power over its coastal ecosystems and the nat

Question

New Project RC Butler 2019  -  Practice 2 RC Passages Everyday   
Passage # 117, Date : 31-MAR-2019
 This post is a part of New Project RC Butler 2019 .  Click here for Details

The extent of a nation’s power over its coastal ecosystems and the natural resources in its coastal waters has been defined by two international law doctrines: freedom of the seas and adjacent state sovereignty. Until the mid-twentieth century, most nations favored application of broad open-seas freedoms and limited sovereign rights over coastal waters. A nation had the right to include within its territorial dominion only a very narrow band of coastal waters (generally extending three miles from the shoreline), within which it had the authority but not the responsibility, to regulate all activities. But, because this area of territorial dominion was so limited, most nations did not establish rules for management or protection of their territorial waters.

Regardless of whether or not nations enforced regulations in their territorial waters, large ocean areas remained free of controls or restrictions. The citizens of all nations had the right to use these unrestricted ocean areas for any innocent purpose, including navigation and fishing. Except for controls over its own citizens, no nation had the responsibility, let alone the unilateral authority, to control such activities in international waters. And, since there were few standards of conduct that applied on the “open seas”, there were few jurisdictional conflicts between nations.

The lack of standards is traceable to popular perceptions held before the middle of this century. By and large, marine pollution was not perceived as a significant problem, in part because the adverse effect of coastal activities on ocean ecosystems was not widely recognized, and pollution caused by human activities was generally believed to be limited to that caused by navigation. Moreover, the freedom to fish, or overfish, was an essential element of the traditional legal doctrine of freedom of the seas that no maritime (of, relating to, or bordering on the sea “a maritime province”) country wished to see limited. And finally, the technology that later allowed exploitation of other ocean resources, such as oil, did not yet exist.

To date, controlling pollution and regulating ocean resources have still not been comprehensively addressed by law, but international law—established through the customs and practices of nations—does not preclude such efforts. And two recent developments may actually lead to future international rules providing for ecosystem management. First, the establishment of extensive fishery zones extending territorial authority as far as 200 miles out from a country’s coast, has provided the opportunity for nations individually to manage larger ecosystems. This opportunity, combined with national self-interest in maintaining fish populations, could lead nations to reevaluate policies for management of their fisheries and to address the problem of pollution in territorial waters. Second, the international community is beginning to understand the importance of preserving the resources and ecology of international waters and to show signs of accepting responsibility for doing so. As an international consensus regarding the need for comprehensive management of ocean resources develops, it will become more likely that international standards and policies for broader regulation of human activities that affect ocean ecosystems will be adopted and implemented.   1 
 B 
 1. According to the passage, until the mid-twentieth century there were few jurisdictional disputes over international waters because.

(A) the nearest coastal nation regulated activities
(B) few controls or restrictions applied to ocean areas
(C) the ocean areas were used for only innocent purposes
(D) the freedom of the seas doctrine settled all claims concerning navigation and fishing
(E) broad authority over international waters was shared equally among all nations

2 
 C 
 2. According to the international law doctrines applicable before the mid-twentieth century, if commercial activity within a particular nation’s territorial waters threatened all marine life in those waters, the nation would have been

(A) formally censured by an international organization for not properly regulating marine activities
(B) called upon by other nations to establish rules to protect its territorial waters
(C) able but not required to place legal limits on such commercial activities
(D) allowed to resolve the problem at it own discretion providing it could contain the threat to its own territorial waters
(E) permitted to hold the commercial offenders liable only if they were citizens of that particular nation

3 
 A 
 3. The author suggests that, before the mid-twentieth century, most nations’ actions with respect to territorial and international waters indicated that

(A) managing ecosystems in either territorial or international waters was given low priority
(B) unlimited resources in international waters resulted in little interest in territorial waters
(C) nations considered it their responsibility to protect territorial but not international waters
(D) a nation’s authority over its citizenry ended at territorial lines
(E) although nations could extend their territorial dominion beyond three miles from their shoreline, most chose not to do so

4 
 C 
 4. The author cites which one of the following as an effect of the extension of territorial waters beyond the three-mile limit?

(A) increased political pressure on individual nations to establish comprehensive laws regulating ocean resources
(B) a greater number of jurisdictional disputes among nations over the regulation of fishing on the open seas
(C) the opportunity for some nations to manage large ocean ecosystems
(D) a new awareness of the need to minimize pollution caused by navigation
(E) a political incentive for smaller nations to solve the problems of pollution in their coastal waters

5 
 C 
 5. According to the passage, before the middle of the twentieth century, nations failed to establish rules protecting their territorial waters because

(A) the waters appeared to be unpolluted and to contain unlimited resources
(B) the fishing industry would be adversely affected by such rules
(C) the size of the area that would be subject to such rules was insignificant
(D) the technology needed for pollution control and resource management did not exist
(E) there were few jurisdictional conflicts over nations’ territorial waters

6 
 D 
 6. The passage as a whole can best be described as

(A) a chronology of the events that have led up to present-day crisis
(B) a legal inquiry into the abuse of existing laws and the likelihood of reform
(C) a political analysis of the problems inherent in directing national attention to an international issue
(D) a historical analysis of a problem that requires international attention
(E) a proposal for adopting and implementing international standards to solve an ecological problem

Source:   LSAT Official PrepTest 4   ( February 1992 ) 
 Difficulty Level:   700

auradediligodo · Accepted Answer

Hi everyone,

Took 12:30 minutes and got 5/6 correct. Took 4:40 minutes to read, write down paragraphs summaries and main point.

P1 
Two rules determined the extent of power over costal water. Why management/rules were not established for these areas

P2 
The degree of control exercised on large ocean areas

P3 
This paragraphs talks about the reasons for the lack of standards:
#1: No perception of pollution
#2: Countries did not want to see their freedom limited
#3: Technology for the exploration of the sea did not exist at the time

Now it comes to our mind the question: Which are the laws that were established first or that are actually in place?
Lucky us P4 will answer this question.

P4 
It describes 2 laws/rules that try to regulate ocean/overseas areas and the possible future benefits coming from those

MP  : Discuss the history of regulation of ocean/overseas water till today

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

1 . According to the passage, until the mid-twentieth century there were few jurisdictional disputes over international waters because.

Pre-thinking:
 
Detail question.

Refer to P2 to answer this question: " And, since there were few standards of conduct that applied on the “open seas” , there were few jurisdictional conflicts between nations."

(A) the nearest coastal nation regulated activities
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(B)   few controls or restrictions applied to ocean areas
 In line with pre-thinking. Hence correct

(C) the ocean areas were used for only innocent purposes
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(D) the freedom of the seas doctrine settled all claims concerning navigation and fishing
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(E) broad authority over international waters was shared equally among all nations
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

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

2 . According to the international law doctrines applicable before the mid-twentieth century, if commercial activity within a particular nation’s territorial waters threatened all marine life in those waters, the nation would have been

Pre-thinking:
 
Detail question.

Let's refer to P1 to answer this one.

"A nation had the right to include within its territorial dominion only a very narrow band of coastal waters (generally extending three miles from the shoreline), within which it had the  authority but not the responsibility, to regulate all activities . But, because this area of territorial dominion was so limited, most nations  did not establish rules for management or protection of their territorial waters. "

In conclusion no action was likely to take place.

(A) formally censured by an international organization for not properly regulating marine activities
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(B) called upon by other nations to establish rules to protect its territorial waters
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(C)   able but not required to place legal limits on such commercial activities
 In line with pre-thinking. Hence correct

(D) allowed to resolve the problem at it own discretion providing it could contain the threat to its own territorial waters
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(E) permitted to hold the commercial offenders liable only if they were citizens of that particular nation
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

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

3 . The author suggests that, before the mid-twentieth century, most nations’ actions with respect to territorial and international waters indicated that

Pre-thinking:

Inference question.

"Until the mid-twentieth century, most nations favored application of broad open-seas freedoms and limited sovereign rights over coastal waters."

No specific measure is taken into consideration.

(A)   managing ecosystems in either territorial or international waters was given low priority
 This is a good inference. Since the nations had the authority but chose not to establish rules over the international waters probably they did not give to the task a high priority. Hence correct

(B) unlimited resources in international waters resulted in little interest in territorial waters
 This cause-effect relation is not logical per the passage. Hence incorrect

(C) nations considered it their responsibility to protect territorial but not international waters
 Cannot be inferred from the information given. Hence incorrect

(D) a nation’s authority over its citizenry ended at territorial lines
 This is wrong. Nations had the authority to do something but not the responsibility. Hence incorrect

(E) although nations could extend their territorial dominion beyond three miles from their shoreline, most chose not to do so
 Cannot be inferred from the information given. Hence incorrect

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

4 . The author cites which one of the following as an effect of the extension of territorial waters beyond the three-mile limit?

Pre-thinking:
 Detail question.

According to paragraph 4 the effect would be "the opportunity for nations individually to manage larger ecosystems."

(A) increased political pressure on individual nations to establish comprehensive laws regulating ocean resources
 Political pressure is not discussed. Hence incorrect

(B) a greater number of jurisdictional disputes among nations over the regulation of fishing on the open seas
 Not mentioned. Hence incorrect.

(C)   the opportunity for some nations to manage large ocean ecosystems
 In line with pre-thinking. Hence correct

(D) a new awareness of the need to minimize pollution caused by navigation
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Plus pollution reduction is discussed later on in another context. Hence incorrect

(E) a political incentive for smaller nations to solve the problems of pollution in their coastal waters
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

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

5 . According to the passage, before the middle of the twentieth century, nations failed to establish rules protecting their territorial waters because

Pre-thinking:
 Detail question.

Refer to P1 to answer this question.

"But,  because this area of territorial dominion was so limited , most nations did not establish rules for management or protection of their territorial waters."

(A) the waters appeared to be unpolluted and to contain unlimited resources
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(B) the fishing industry would be adversely affected by such rules
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(C)   the size of the area that would be subject to such rules was insignificant
  in line with pre-thinking. Hence correct

(D) the technology needed for pollution control and resource management did not exist
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

(E) there were few jurisdictional conflicts over nations’ territorial waters
 Not in line with pre-thinking. Hence incorrect

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

6 . The passage as a whole can best be described as

Pre-thinking:
 Refer to main point above

(A) a chronology of the events that have led up to present-day crisis
 No present-day crisis. Hence incorrect

(B) a legal inquiry into the abuse of existing laws and the likelihood of reform
 No legal inquiry. Hence incorrect

(C) a political analysis of the problems inherent in directing national attention to an international issue
 No political analysis. Hence incorrect

(D)   a historical analysis of a problem that requires international attention
 This is correct

(E) a proposal for adopting and implementing international standards to solve an ecological problem
 No proposal mentioned. Hence incorrect

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

It is a good day to be alive, cheers

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Hello  UdithKiran  Here it is.

Explanation

5. According to the passage, before the middle of the twentieth century, nations failed to establish rules protecting their territorial waters because

Difficulty Level:   700

Explanation

We know countries didn’t care much about regulating territorial waters, but now we’re asked “ Why? ”. Well, it’s no secret—we’re told the reason in lines:

"to regulate all activities. But, because this area of territorial dominion was so limited, most nations did not establish rules for management or protection of their territorial waters."

and  (C)  nicely paraphrases the explanation.  (A), (B), (D)  All of these choices reflect either beliefs about or the situation in international, not territorial, waters.  (E)  This choice would be a good common sense guess if the passage were missing, but since we have the passage right in front of us, we know this was not the reason for the lack of regulation in question. “ Jurisdictional conflicts ” is a concept relating to the open seas, not territorial waters, so this choice can’t help explain anything.

This is an excellent example of why it’s important to go back and re-read the relevant piece(s) of text before answering explicit text questions—all of the answers seem plausible. If you don’t go back and re-read when faced with this sort of question, you can easily fall for one of the wrong choices.

ANSWER: C

Hope it helps

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Hello guys

Kaustubh30 
 abhishek31 
 blueshores

May your doubts get cleared

Explanation

6. The passage as a whole can best be described as

Difficulty Level:   700

Explanation

The passage is an historical analysis—it discusses matters before the mid-20th century as well as today—and it is about a problem that requires international attention—the
regulation of activities on the oceans.

(A)  The passage doesn’t mention dates or probe specific events, so chronology isn’t the right term for the text. Besides, the word “ crisis ” is a bit strong: A problem isn’t the same as a crisis.

(B)  The passage certainly can’t be called a  “legal inquiry,”  even though it does touch on legal issues. Furthermore, there’s nothing in the text about  “abuse of existing laws . . .”

(C)  This passage doesn’t qualify as a “political analysis of the problems inherent in directing national attention” to an international issue. It’s a historical analysis of an international problem.

(E)  The author never sets forth any concrete proposal. He simply states that the problem of exploitation of the oceans needs to be addressed by the international community.

• The correct answer to a global question must be broad enough to encompass the entire passage, yet specific enough to refer to its actual content.

ANSWER: D

Hope it helps

rocky620 · Answer

Dear  Sajjad1994 , can you please share the explanation for Q3?

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

3. The author suggests that, before the mid-twentieth century, most nations’ actions with respect to territorial and international waters indicated that

Difficulty Level:   600-650

Explanation

The whole theme of the first  two paragraphs  is that the nations just didn’t seem to care much about regulating their territorial waters, and that the international scene pretty much took care of itself. In other words,  “low priority,”  as stated in correct choice  (A) . If you were clear on the gist of the first  two paragraphs , you shouldn’t have needed to go back to the passage to pick up this point, but if you were still a little unsure, it’s right there in black and white: The last sentence of  Paragraph 1  says that, before the mid-20th century, most nations didn’t bother to regulate activities in their territorial waters.  Paragraph 2  says that, during the same period, activities in international waters were basically unregulated as well. Evidently, what went on in the oceans was not of much concern to the international community, which once again points to  “low priority.”

(B)  In this wrong choice, the test makers sneak in a common Logical Reasoning tactic, the scope shift: Nothing in the passages suggests that nations were uninterested in their territorial waters—lack of interest in regulating these waters doesn’t equate to an overall lack of interest in them. Further, nothing in the passage suggests that nations felt that international waters held unlimited resources.

(C)  Although nations had the authority to regulate activities in their coastal waters, few were actually interested in doing so. Moreover, nations were precluded by law, not custom, from regulating activities in international waters.

(D)  Opposite. Lines:  (Except for controls over its own citizens, no nation had the responsibility, let alone the unilateral authority, to control such activities in international waters.)  indicate that a nation had the right to control the behavior of its citizens (but only its citizens) in international waters.

(E)  Opposite. Before the mid-20th century, nations could not extend their territorial control beyond three miles. Only recently have some extended control beyond this point.

Answer: A

nishantswaft · Answer

Sajjad1994   GMATNinja  Which statement could then qualify as a political description just as speaking about two different periods qualified as a historical analysis?

GMATNinja · Answer

Question 6

It sounds like you are asking why (C) is incorrect. Yes, you could argue that the passage does discuss  politics , since it talks about  governing  the oceans.

The problem with (C) is that the passage is not concerned with the problems inherent in  directing national attention  to the issue. For all we know, nations are fully aware of the issue.

Being aware of the issue isn't the same as trying to address the issue. The nations might already be aware, but they have not yet developed or implemented international standards and policies for broader regulation of human activities that affect ocean ecosystems.

Instead, the passage is concerned with tracing the history of the issue, so (D) is a better fit.

raviteja00seven · Answer

I am not satisfied with the reasoning for question 4 .

The passage also mentioned that the practices lead to pollution control, so why not OPTION D.

GMATNinja · Answer

Choice (D) only refers to pollution caused   by navigation  . We know from paragraph three that nations were already aware that navigation caused pollution:

We are told that the extension of territorial waters beyond the three-mile limit "  could   lead nations to reevaluate policies for management of their fisheries and to address the problem of pollution in territorial waters." But even that is just a POSSIBLE effect of the extension. Choice (D) might be true, but there's little evidence suggesting that the extension led to a   new   awareness of the need to minimize pollution caused by navigation.

Choice (C) is directly supported in the final paragraph, so it's a better answer:

I hope that helps!

The extent of a nation’s power over its coastal ecosystems and the nat

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

The extent of a nation’s power over its coastal ecosystems and the nat

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