Each year red-winged blackbirds stop in a certain region of Midland
                    Province on their spring and fall migrations.  In the fall, they eat a significant portion of the province’s sunflower crop.  This year Midland farmers sought permits to set out small amounts of poisoned rice during the blackbirds’ spring stop in order to reduce the fall blackbird population.  Some residents voiced concern that the rice could threaten certain species of rare migratory birds.  Nevertheless, the wildlife agency approved the permits.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to justify the wildlife agency’s approval of the permits, given the concerns voiced by some residents?

1. In the region where the red-winged blackbirds stop, they are the first birds to be present in the spring.
2. The poison that farmers want to use does not kill birds but rather makes them incapable of producing viable eggs.
3. Since rice is not raised in Midland
                           Province, few species of birds native to the province normally eat rice.
4. Without the permit, any farmers shown to have set out poison for the blackbirds would be heavily fined.
5. The poison that farmers got approval to use has no taste or smell that would make it detectable by birds.

   Answer: A

为何答案是A不是C?

Resovle the paradox

poisoned rice 对很多鸟都有毒，但希望它只对blackbird 起作用。

那就让blackbird第一拨来，把poisoned rice 都吃了。 就是A的内容。

C 说的是native bird不吃，但是原文中说的是migratory birds。无关选项：）

D应该不对吧，题目让你分析agency为什么会approved the permits，D说没有批准，下毒的行为是禁止的。没有涉及原文中的逻辑，分析为什么会同意这种批准。而且这种说法感觉很主观。

对于B  producing viable eggs 是个无关选项。

感觉逻辑题对细节抠的很紧啊，一个单词理解错误就会导致选择出错。那大家是怎么解决做题速度

和对细节的把握这个paradox呢？？