一道逻辑题，怎么也没看出为什么正确答案更好？

小KUN虫

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?  

A .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.  
 
B. Recovery of the species would enable some hunting to continue without putting the manatees' survival in jeopardy again.  
 
C. 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.  
 
D. There would not be enough former manatee hunters to act as guides for all the tourists who want to see manatees.  
 
 E.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.  

主要焦点就是A和E ，A说游客对此不感兴趣并不愿意支付那些当地人的关于参观这地方的要价，很明显驳斥了原文的计划，因为计划前提就是游客对此感兴趣。

但正确答案却是E，那些本地人将要用更大的船只并要走更多的路比起以前去载游客去那里，虽然也有驳斥作用但明显不如A更好，为什么答案会是E呢？

dumdumface

A应该是无关.就算前提没有说游客没有兴趣,答案也不会是A.因为文中的结论是能达到2个目的:1. 停止捕猎 2.让旅客去看M

仔细看E  1. 猎人要换船 2. 绕路 3. 更大船到M的fragile habitan.--> 1. 换船要钱吧, 钱从哪里来? 捕M  2. 绕路吧, 要很多可能hunter以前没有走的路-->他们的expert knowledge可能没有用处了,让游客到不了那个地方 3. 更大船的到fragile habitan--> 就算不捕猎了,破坏了环境,还是达不到保护的效果

小KUN虫

加了那么多条件来解释E了啊，逻辑题不是不能自己加条件分析么？因为那样很多错误答案也可以算是正确的了

克瑞斯

感觉A 和E 都可以，E是fragile habitat，不利于the manatee；但A不知道哪错了，求NN解释。

yichenghaha

A选项驳斥原文的truth:Tourist interest is high  因此没有说服力