Visiting animals in their natural homes may sound like a great idea that helps to save them, but is it ?
Researchers writing in Trends in Ecology ＆ Evolution on Oct9 said that the interactions between wild animals and friendly eco-tourists who want to take their pictures may put animals at greater risk of being eaten.
It is clear that many people visit protected areas every year. “Recent data showed that protected areas around the globe have 8 billion visitors per year; that’s like each human on Earth visited a protected area once a year, and then some!”said Dainel Blumstein of the University of California, Los Anglels. “This amount of nature tourism and eco-tourism can be added to the long list of ways in which humans cause fast environmental change.
The basic idea of the report the report is that humans change the ways animals act and those changes might affect other parts of their lives, according to Science Daily. Those changes in behavior and activity may put animals at risk.
“When animals spend time in ‘harmless’ ways with humans, they may let down their guard,” Blumstein said. As animals get used to feeling comfortable with humans, they may become braver in other situations, he says . “If this bravery continues when they meet real predators（捕食者）， then they will die more often when they meet them.”
Eco-tourism is in some ways similar to making animals live in human homes or in cities. In all three cases, regular interactions between people and animals tame. Evidence has shown that silver foxes that live with people become more laid-back and less fearful; this results from evolutionary changes but also from spending time with humans. Simply put , as Blumstein asked in the Scientific American magazine:“Does eco-tourism make animals dumb?”
And that’s not all-humans can also scare away natural predators , creating the so-called “human shield effect” and a safe environment for smaller animals that might make them braver, too. When humans are around, for example, vervet monkeys don’t see as many leopards (猎豹) trying to eat them.
Blumstein says they hope to do more research into humans’ interactions with wildlife. Scientists will “now have to understand better how different species and species in different situations react to humans and when humans might put them at risk.
32. The main focus of report in Trends in Ecology ＆ Evolution was the idea that ______.
A. eco-tourism cause damage to the natural homes of wildlife.
B. it is easy for eco-tourists to build up trust with wide animals.
C. the changes brought by eco-tourism may be harmful.
D. protected areas around the world are overloaded with tourists.
33. The underlined word “dumb” in paragraph 6 probably means ________.
A anxious B active C curious D stupid
34. The author uses vervet monkeys as an example to show that ________.
A. different species react to humans in different ways.
B. the presence of humans reduces the threat from predators
C. smaller animals tend to be braver in front of predators.
D. interactions with humans make animals more relaxed and less fearful.
35．We can infer that the writer wrote this passage mainly to .
A．explain what eco-tourism is
B．tell us something interesting about Nature
C．suggest that we stop eating meat to save animals
D．Wildlife tourism may seem helpful, but it can be deadly for some animals