2. 外语
  3. In the past, hunting was a necessity, with humans killing wild animals for food and clothing. However, modern hunters generally

In the past, hunting was a necessity, with humans killing wild animals for food and clothing. However, modern hunters generally

admin2019-02-25  63
问题
    In the past, hunting was a necessity, with humans killing wild animals for food and clothing. However, modern hunters generally hunt for one of two reasons: for sport, or because it’s part of their traditional culture. Can hunting ever be justified?
    Hunting for sport is popular all over the world. Every year in the United States, more than 12 million people go hunting: and wealthy enthusiasts from around the world pay thousands to go on African safaris. While many recreational hunters eat the animals they kill, others simply do it for trophies. These so-called trophy hunters pay taxidermists to stuff and mount the dead animals, which they then display in their homes as souvenirs.
    So, should hunting for sport be allowed? No, says animal rights group PETA. They believe animals have the right to live out their natural lives in the wild. And the group notes that hunted animals often escape after being wounded and are left to die slowly and painfully. Other anti-hunting activists argue that hunters prefer to kill the bigger members of a species, which often leaves the smaller ones behind to breed. As a result, the entire species slowly become weaker.
    Of course, many hunters disagree. They claim that responsible hunters follow a strict code of conduct, which includes never letting a wounded animal escape, and never taking a shot at an animal unless it’s going to be a clean kill. Hunters also argue that their sport keeps certain species in check, preventing overpopulation. For example, they say that if waterfowl weren’t hunted, their numbers would grow too large, leading to outbreaks of fowl cholera, a disease dangerous to humans.

    Hunters even argue that they’re helping endangered species. This is because many countries reinvest hunting revenue (from permits or safari fees)back into animal conservation. For example, some of the money that Zimbabwe earns from foreign elephant hunters is put back into elephant conservation. As a result, Zimbabwean elephant numbers are actually steadily increasing. However, conservationists say that killing animals in order to save them is hypocritical and that there are other ways to protect endangered wildlife.
    But what about traditional cultures who still hunt for their food? The Inuit people have lived in the Arctic for thousands of years and their traditional diet includes the endangered bowhead whale. Local laws allow them to kill a limited number of bowheads a year and many Inuit argue that traditional societies must adapt and drop endangered species from their diets.  
What could be the consequence of not hunting waterfowl?
选项
答案Outbreak of fowl cholera
解析 (第四段第四句提到狩猎者称“如果不对水禽进行捕杀，其数量就会激增，到最后就会导致禽霍乱的发生”。)
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/C38K777K
本试题收录于： B类竞赛（英语专业本科专科）题库大学生英语竞赛（NECCS）分类
0

B类竞赛（英语专业本科专科）

大学生英语竞赛（NECCS）

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)