Eight years ago hunting was banned in Greenfield County on the grounds that hunting endangers public safety. Now the deer population in the county is six times what it was before the ban. Deer are invading residential areas, damaging property and causing motor vehicle accidents that result in serious injury to motorists. Since there were never any hunting-related injuries in the county, clearly the ban was not only unnecessary but has created a danger to public safety that would not otherwise exist.
Which one of the following, if true, provides the strongest additional support for the conclusion above?
(A) In surrounding counties, where hunting is permitted, the size of the deer population has not
increased in the last eight years.
(B)[K1] Motor vehicle accidents involving deer often result in damage to the vehicle, injury to the motorist, or both.
(C) When deer populations increase beyond optimal size, disease and malnutrition become more widespread among the deer herds.
(D) In residential areas in the county, many residents provide food and salt for deer.（A）
(E) Deer can cause extensive damage to ornamental shrubs and trees by chewing on twigs and saplings.
文章：8年前，狩猎在Greenfield是被禁止的，因为狩猎威胁到了公共安全。现在，该县鹿的数量是禁令实行之前的6倍。鹿都正侵入居住的区域，破坏财产和造成摩托车交通事故，这些事故造成摩托车驾驶者的严重受伤。由于在该县没有任何狩猎相关的伤亡，显然该禁令不仅没有必要而且给公共安全造成了威胁，这种危险如果反之是不会存在的。
a. 在周围县城狩猎时允许的，那里的鹿的数目在过去8年并没有增加
b. 摩托车事故涉及到鹿经常造成交通工具的破坏，摩托车驾驶者，或者两者（非additional加强，重复文章事实，鹿群对居民造成损失）
c. 当鹿的数目增加超过最有结构式，疾病和营养不良就会在鹿群中更加广泛（无关）
d. 在该县城的居住区域，许多居民为鹿提供食物和盐（无关）
e. 鹿可以对通过咀嚼嫩枝和树叶对装饰用的灌木造成破坏（非additional加强，装饰用的，说明是民用，鹿对民用的东西造成了破坏）
大家看看这道题是不是该这样去想。我开始选了E，后来所给答案为A
求证一下！open to discussion.
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |