Some species of Arctic birds are threatened by recent sharp increases in the population of snow geese, which breed in the Arctic and are displacing birds of less vigorous species. Although snow geese are a popular quarry for hunters in the southern regions where they winter, the hunting season ends if and when hunting has reduced the population by five percent, according to official estimates. Clearly, dropping this restriction would allow the other species to recover.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument?
首先我们先看一下逻辑关系。
近几年来SG的数量大增，这威胁到A鸟的生存。SG是一个很受欢迎的狩猎鸟，在狩猎季内，如果或当SG减少的数目达到5%的时候，狩猎季结束。所以有人就说了，如果取消5%的限制，就可以久被SG吃的鸟。换言之，更多的SG被杀，更多的A鸟会存活，而限制SG被杀的原因就是那5%的配额。如果提高了配额，更多的SG被杀，更多的A鸟会存活。
在读题的时候，大家会有点晕，而晕的句子就是 “the hunting season ends if and when hunting has reduced the population by five percent”和 “dropping this restriction would allow the other species to recover.” dropping的意思是抛弃，不是降低
关于选项，其他的就不讨论了，重点说一下B
B可以分为2部分
第一部分是 “It has been many years”
第二部分是 “ since the restriction led to the hunting season for snow geese being closed earlier than the scheduled date.”
第一部分的翻译是，这已经过去了很多年
第二部分的翻译是，当配额导致狩猎季提前结束
结合在一起，通俗点说，就是 配额提前被用完的日子已经过去了很多年了。
加入收藏
在线答疑
