2. 考研
  3. 　　Springwatch is back. It’s the BBC’s largest outside broadcasting event, with regular audiences approaching 4 million, and I’m

　　Springwatch is back. It’s the BBC’s largest outside broadcasting event, with regular audiences approaching 4 million, and I’m

admin2022-02-15  44
问题 　　Springwatch is back. It’s the BBC’s largest outside broadcasting event, with regular audiences approaching 4 million, and I’m among its greatest fans, having watched every series since it began in 2005. But this year I’ve begun to worry about the gulf opening up between the wonderful richness on our screens and the urgent biodiversity crisis unfolding off camera.
　　Springwatch’s unique contribution to wildlife programming is its emphasis on citizen science.
　　The audience is encouraged to observe and submit data about gardens and local spaces, a model of environmental engagement. But deep down, Springwatch is rooted in the tradition of nature programming; intimate stories of wildlife focusing on nature’s eternal beauty and fascinating behaviors. What’s missing is coverage of the human pressures on habitat. The conservation defence for presenting wildlife in closeup and excluding human impact is that the intimate focus triggers a love of nature that motivates its protection. But something doesn’t stack up here.
　　Since the 60s, British broadcasting has been the world leader in nature programming, with incredible photography, storytelling, research and brilliant presenters. Yet a recent WWF report showed the UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. Among declines too numerous to list, a quarter of Britain’s mammals are now at risk of extinction. Farmland birds have declined by 50% since the 70s. Shockingly, the UK is in the global bottom 10% in terms of remaining biodiversity. The report puts the leading cause of extinction down to the " catastrophic impact" of humans on habitats. Wildlife habitats have been destroyed by agricultural practices, woodland clearance and the industrializing of countryside by house and infrastructure projects.
　　How will Springwatch deal with the threat to Minsmere, in Suffolk, for years the main location for the series? Minsmere is one of the RSPB’s top reserves, an area bursting with wildlife. Now the energy company EDF plans to build the new nuclear power station next door. Could Springwatch ever mention this? Or would the programme handle it as the nature series Countryfile did with its item on the Colne Valley? This focused on protecting the ecosystem from an "invader" —the penny-wort plant. It neglected to mention a much more serious invader; High Speed Rail. Talk about a white elephant in the room.
　　I sympathize with the programme-makers. The more nature is destroyed, the more Springwatch and Countryfile are needed as succour to our wounded souls. It’s also difficult for Springwatch to appear political. If TV news and current affairs recognized the assault on the British countryside and the biodiversity crisis as important news stories, then Springwatch and Countryfile would stick to what they do best.
What can we infer from Paragraph 2?
选项 A、Springwatch advocates protection for wildlife.
B、Springwatch excludes human impact.
C、Springwatch fails in its interpretation.
D、Springwatch triggers audiences to love nature.
答案C
解析 推断题。根据题干可定位至第二段，其中，选项A、选项B和选项D均是文中第二段中直接出现的内容．故排除；最后一段中表示presenting wildlife in closeup“拍摄野生动物特写”和excluding human impact“排除人类影响”是因为亲密的关注激发了人们对自然的爱，从而去保护自然，但是最后一句中的but表示转折，且doesn’t stack up意为“站不住脚”，可知作者认为这个解释并不成立。此外，下面各段的主题均是人类的干预活动破坏了生物多样性，所以将人类影响排除在外的做法自然是站不住脚的，故选项C正确。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/M5g7FFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)