求一道GWD逻辑

13873194104

In parts of the Caribbean, the manatee, an endangered marine mammal, has long been hunted for its meat.  Having noted the manatee hunters' expert knowledge of manatees' habits, local conservationists are encouraging the hunters to stop hunting and instead to take tourists on boat rides to see manatees.  Tourist interest is high, so the plan has promise of achieving the twin goals of giving the former hunters a good income and helping ensure the manatees' survival.

Which of the following, if true, raises the most serious doubt about the plan's chance of success?

	Many tourists who visit these parts of the Caribbean are uninterested in manatees and would not be willing to pay what the former manatee hunters would have to charge for boat rides to see manatees.
	Recovery of the species would enable some hunting to continue without putting the manatees' survival in jeopardy again.
	In areas where manatees have traditionally been hunted for food, local people could easily replace the manatee meat in their diets with other foods obtained from the sea.
	There would not be enough former manatee hunters to act as guides for all the tourists who want to see manatees.
	To maintain their current income, manatee hunters who switched to guiding tourists would have to use far larger boats and make many more trips into the manatees' fragile habitat than they currently do.

GWD的答案选E 本人选A    自己简略分析一下  A的缺陷在Many tourists 不代表Most torists,而且文中有说tourists interest is high,所以与文中事实或多或少有排斥，不太好。 但A这句话确实直接cast doubt on the argument。

E的缺陷是没有直接说出与文中的关联，即使make more trips into the M's fragile habitat 也不代表会ensure the M's survival


望NN指点

open to discussion

maximeason

文中已经说到了tourist interest is high 所以不应该再考虑没有tourist的情况了 而是考虑 在tourist来了之后会带来的情况
 虽然文中并没有说 用大船什么的一定会破坏他们的栖息地

13873194104

求NN解呀

s19870117

我也想选A。。。。但我觉得确实many挺不对的。。。。