求助GWD24-7

haze619

7
Which of the following most logically completes the argument below?
The expansion of large-scale farming in Africa and Asia has destroyed much of the natural vegetation on which elephants have historically depended, forcing them to turn to cultivated land to satisfy their enormous appetites. As a result, farmers have lost millions of dollars worth of crops annually. Yet even if elephant sanctuaries were created on a widespread basis to guarantee elephants sufficient natural vegetation, the raiding would likely persist, since            
A.    when elephants forage for food, they typically travel in herds.
B.    Foraging elephants have been known to cause substantial damage even to plants that they do not eat.
C.    Some of the land where crops have suffered extensive damage from elephants has been allowed to return to its natural state.
D.    Elephants tend to prefer cultivated crops to wild vegetation as a food source.
E.    Elephant sanctuaries are usually created in areas that are rich in the natural vegetation on which elephants have historically depended.

AnttiZhang

The conclusion is:
Even if elephant sanctuaries were created on a widespread basis to guarantee elephants sufficient natural vegetation, the raiding would likely persist.

And we are asked to provide a reason.

D can be that reason.  If elephants like cultivated crops more than the wild vegetation, they will continue raiding even if sancturaries are created to provide natural vegetation. They are hooked!

a514116402c

E 选项呢？

haze619

natural vegetation = wild plants. No human activities are around.

flyfairy019

e
选项是一个削弱 我觉得
就算是放在一个地方 大象却还是不喜欢 喜欢去破坏

hebby0513

B呢？？求解答

billsq

我觉得是这样，新作物灭掉老植物，大象一直吃老植物，注意细

节关键字historical, 老植物没了，大象只能吃新作物，为了不让大

象吃新作物，计划恢复老植物，但是大象接着毁新作物。逻辑支持这

个结论的是，恢复老植物不影响大象吃新作物，B错是因为，原文中

说，保护区实际上已经有了widespread老植物garuantee大象够吃，

那么就意味着大象不觅食也够，B建立在觅食上，所以不对。D对因为，

老植物够吃大象也不吃，所以计划无效。