标题: BAT 求教一道GWD逻辑题 TN23 Q3 (TTGWD11-Q9) [打印本页] 作者: superbat28 时间: 2011-8-30 19:36 标题: BAT 求教一道GWD逻辑题 TN23 Q3 (TTGWD11-Q9) The population of desert tortoises in Targland’s Red Desert has declined, partly because they are captured for sale as pets and partly because people riding all-terrain vehicles have damaged their habitat. Targland plans to halt this population decline by blocking the current access routes into the desert and announcing new regulations to allow access only on foot. Targland’s officials predict that these measures will be adequate, since it is difficult to collect the tortoises without a vehicle.
Which of the following would it be most important to establish in order to evaluate the officials’ prediction?
A. Whether possessing the tortoises as pets remains legally permissible in Targland B. Whether Targland is able to enforce the regulations with respect to all-terrain vehicle entry at points other than the current access routes C. Whether the Red Desert tortoises are most active during the day or at night D. Whether people who travel on foot in the Red Desert often encounter the tortoises E. Whether the Targland authorities held public hearings before restricting entry by vehicle into the Red Desert BAT貌似是第一次在CR区贴~囧~ 这道题GWD答案给的是B，而我认为答案是D。想看看大家意见。 （尽管我知道GWD一般都有争议，但很少看到CR有争议的。。）
我的理由是，看原文，stimulus中已经说到by blocking the current access routes into the desert and announcing new regulations to allow access only on foot，这也就证明我们所探讨的这个plan所限定的范围已经确定了，就是这个“只限制了current access routes”的这个plan，所以B就应该是无关项了啊~
大家有什么想法啊>?<作者: sdcar2010 时间: 2011-8-31 00:29
That's exactly the potential problem of the proposed plan by focusing ONLY on current access routes.
B) is the correct answer. If those all-terrain vehicle CAN bypass the current access routes and enter the desert, then proachers or drivers driving those vehicles would not be affected by the new regulation. If those all-terrain vehicle CANNOT enter unless via current access routes, then the regulation might work as planned.作者: 秋叶蠖 时间: 2011-8-31 15:58
T的减少由两个方面造成，第一是被抓走，第二是栖息地破坏
LZ忽略了后面一句，it is difficult to collect the tortoises without a vehicle，说的是没有车T不会被抓走，所以D选项，前提是on foot，所以不管遇到没遇到，都不会带走T，所以不会导致T数量下降。作者: superbat28 时间: 2011-8-31 16:46
To sdcar and 秋叶蠖, I know that sdcar requires us to use English and think in English, so here I will type in English. hoho~
Well, sorry for replying so late, and thx for the help, but I still cannot understand. Here, I find a cruical thing: What is the meaning of "collect" here.
I treated the stimulus in the following "brain flow" :
The administrators want to preserve tortises by adopting such a strategy- Blocking all the the current access routes into the desert and announcing new regulations to allow access only on foot. Why such a strategy can have its intended effect? Because it is difficult for people to collect tortises on foot.
Here, "collect" may mean "find" or "bring together", as we always say that "The company collects information about consumer trends."
So, the author in the stimuls is thinking about that "Since people can hardly find any torties if they come into desert on foot, then the stated regulation will have its intended effect."
However, if we answer "no" to choice D, then it undermines the whole argument, since it shows that "it will still be easy for people to collect (or encounter) torties"
But for B, I still contend it is irrelevant. Obviously in OG, we often meet such anout of scope choice. What we are ask to do is to evaluate the current posed plan, the specific one, why should we question something about the plan itself- whether it can be more effective by involving sth. else?
That is my opinion, open to discuss~作者: sdcar2010 时间: 2011-8-31 22:30 partly because they are captured for sale as pets and partly because people riding all-terrain vehicles have damaged their habitat
it is difficult to collect the tortoises without a vehicle
The Assumption is that by blocking the route, vehicles cannot get into the area. Then no tortoises would be lost since it is difficult to collect them without a vehicle. 作者: walt77 时间: 2013-3-25 15:42
这题确实有点奇怪。