Q3

[hyewonkim89]

I'm a little thrown off by this question.

Is (E) the answer because the passage says "After hearing testimony establishing that Alaska Natives had made many uses of sea otters-----" in lines 41-45?

[tommywallach]

Hey There Hye,

Doesn't sound like you're too confused--you found the relevant quotation immediately. What's confusing? That's a testimony, and the court heard it, and then they made their decision!

As for the wrong answers:

(A) The court is arguing that terminology needs to be less narrow, though technically they weigh in more on "within living memory" then "long-standing" anyway.

(B) This is the opposite of what the court did. They don't like the phrase at all. It isn't a question of redefining it, but of cutting it entirely.

(C) Again, this goes against what the course did. They aren't adhering strictly, because they don't like the wording of those regulations.

(D) The court's decision had nothing to do with the original treaty made in 1910.

(E) CORRECT. It's vague and kind of weird, but as you saw, there's no arguing with it!

-t