CAT 2024 Slot 2 VARC · Question 18
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage,
choose the best answer for each question.
(. . .) There are three other common
drivers for carnivore-human attacks, some of which are more preventable than others. Natural
aggression-based conflicts – such as those involving females protecting their young or
animals protecting a food source – can often be avoided as long as people stay away from
those animals and their food.
Carnivores that recognise humans as a means to get food,
are a different story. As they become more reliant on human food they might find at
campsites or in rubbish bins, they become less avoidant of humans. Losing that instinctive
fear response puts them into more situations where they could get into an altercation with a
human, which often results in that bear being put down by humans. "A fed bear is a dead
bear," says Servheen, referring to a common saying among biologists and
conservationists.
Predatory or predation-related attacks are quite rare, only
accounting for 17% of attacks in North America since 1955. They occur when a carnivore views
a human as prey and hunts it like it would any other animal it uses for food. (. .
.)
Then there are animal attacks provoked by people taking pictures with them or
feeding them in natural settings such as national parks which often end with animals being
euthanised out of precaution. "Eventually, that animal becomes habituated to people, and
[then] bad things happen to the animal. And the folks who initially wanted to make that
connection don't necessarily realise that," says Christine Wilkinson, a postdoctoral
researcher at UC Berkeley, California, who's been studying coyote-human conflicts.
After conducting countless postmortems on all types of carnivore-human attacks
spanning 75 years, Penteriani's team believes 50% could have been avoided if humans reacted
differently. A 2017 study co-authored by Penteriani found that engaging in risky behaviour
around large carnivores increases the likelihood of an attack.
Two of the most common
risky behaviours are parents leaving their children to play outside unattended and walking
an unleashed dog, according to the study. Wilkinson says 66% of coyote attacks involve a
dog. "[People] end up in a situation where their dog is being chased, or their dog chases a
coyote, or maybe they're walking their dog near a den that's marked, and the coyote wants to
escort them away," says Wilkinson.
Experts believe climate change also plays a
part in the escalation of human-carnivore conflicts, but the correlation still needs to be
ironed out. "As finite resources become scarcer, carnivores and people are coming into more
frequent contact, which means that more conflict could occur," says Jen Miller,
international programme specialist for the US Fish & Wildlife Service. For example, she
says, there was an uptick in lion attacks in western India during a drought when lions and
people were relying on the same water sources.
(. . .) The likelihood of
human-carnivore conflicts appears to be higher in areas of low-income countries dominated by
vast rural landscapes and farmland, according to Penteriani's research. "There are a lot of
working landscapes in the Global South that are really heterogeneous, that are interspersed
with carnivore habitats, forests and savannahs, which creates a lot more opportunity for
these encounters, just statistically," says Wilkinson.
According to the passage, which of the following scenarios would MOST likely exacerbate the frequency of carnivore-human conflicts?
- A.Attempting to photograph wild animals from within secured viewing areas in national parks and protected zones.
- B.Implementing 'food waste' management strategies to prevent wild animals being attracted to human food sources.
- C.Addressing the impact of climate change on the availability of resources for wildlife.
- D.Unleashing dogs by pet owners in areas with known high concentrations of large carnivores.
Sign in free to see the answer and the step-by-step solution.
Show answer