Bunuel wrote:
If the ivory trade continues, experts believe, the elephant will soon become extinct in Africa, because poaching is rife in many areas. A total ban on ivory trading would probably prevent the extinction. However, the country of Zimbabwe—which has virtually eliminated poaching within its borders and which relies on income from carefully culling elephant herds that threaten to become too big—objects to such a ban. Zimbabwe holds that the problem lies not with the ivory trade but with the conservation policies of other countries.
Which one of the following principles forms a logical basis for Zimbabwe’s objection to a ban?
Key takeaways from the passage:1. Experts - A total ban on poaching Elephants needs to be brought in to prevent extinction of the species
2. The govt. of Zimbabwe has eliminated all illegal poaching but at the same time it needs to control the overall Elephant population relative to the forest area available because Elephants damage vegetation, destroy crops and attack surrounding human settlements when they become too many in numbers. These are just some examples I put in to elaborate the author's view on
elephant herds that threaten to become too big3. The govt. of Zimbabwe does not support this total ban because this ban will also mean that Zimbabwe can no longer take actions to prevent Elephant populations and in turn will have to face the losses resulting from the over crowding of Elephants. In other words now that Zimbabwe has eliminated all illegal poaching and is no longer responsible for the extinction, it should not be further impacted by the policies
(A) International measures to correct a problem should not adversely affect countries that are not responsible for the problemThis is in line with what we inferred and is the correct answer
(E) Effective conservation cannot be achieved without eliminating poachingAsk the question - Does this form of the basis of Zimbabwe's opposition to total ban? No, in fact the passage mentions that Zimbabwe has already taken steps to ban on illegal poaching. Zimbabwe has problems with the total ban policy that will prevent it from controlling over crowding of Elephants
Options B, C and D are relatively simple to eliminate if you ask the question - does Zimbabwe use this point to oppose the total ban?
(B) Freedom of trade is not a right but a consequence of agreements among nationsZimbabwe's opposition to trade no where brings in freedom of trade as a point and this is a general statement that has nothing to do with the passage in hand
(C) Respecting a country’s sovereignty is more important than preventing the extinction of a speciesMight be true in real life but does Zimbabwe use this as a reason to oppose the total ban? - No
(D) Prohibitions affecting several countries should be enforced by a supranational agencyAgain, might be true in real life but does Zimbabwe use this as a reason to oppose the total ban? - No
Ans -
A