Passage 1.After years of hard work by conservationists.throughout Asia, a new study brings good news for.the world’s wild tigers. According to a new report by.the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the number of.tigers living in the wild may have been slowly rising.over the last several years. If continued surveys prove.this to be true, this would mark the first time in more.than a century that tiger populations have grown..In a study compiling surveys taken across Asia,.researchers at the WWF found that there are at least 3,890 tigers living in the wild today—a considerable.increase from the 3,200 recorded in 2010. The study.suggests that the commitment to and success of.conservation programs in some countries have.contributed to the overall growth of the global tiger.population..“It’s a positive trend,” Ginette Hemley, the WWF’s.senior vice president of wildlife conservation, says..“We’re cautiously hopeful.”.Counting wild tigers, however, isn’t easy. While.tens of thousands of tigers once roamed Asia from.Turkey to Indonesia, their habitats have become tiny.and scattered during the last century. Wild tigers are.notoriously elusive, preferring to hide out in hard-to-.reach places in jungle undergrowth and high.mountains..Combined with their low numbers, these factors.can make them difficult to keep track of, which can.leave some uncertainty as to whether the populations.are truly on the rise. The increased numbers may in.part reflect better surveying methods..Additionally, while the global number of wild.tigers appears to have gone up, a country-by-country.analysis is more sobering. Though several countries.including India, Nepal, Bhutan and Russia may have.gone up in recent years, others have seen tigers.disappear thanks to poaching and habitat loss..Passage 2.Photographic capture-recapture and large-scale.occupancy modeling are now used to estimate tiger.numbers and range in several countries across Asia..(Scientists who study other elusive carnivores with.unique body markings, including African wild dogs.and wolverines, are also employing these approaches.).Yet on the whole, although the science of tiger.population assessment has rapidly progressed, its.adoption by governmental and nongovernmental.conservation agencies has not, whether because of a.lack of understanding of or comfort with the new.methods or because the old methods cast a more.flattering light on their efforts..A recent example illustrates just how insidious.reliance on outdated tools is. In April the WWF and.the Global Tiger Forum announced to great fanfare.that the planet’s wild tiger population was at last on.the rise, numbering 3,890 individuals. These groups.aim to increase the number of tigers to 6,000 by 2022..But their tally, based on official estimates, relied on.flawed methodologies, including the use of.statistically weak extrapolations from tiger.photographs and field counts of spoor.^1 And their.goal for population growth far exceeds what one.would expect to realize on the basis of studies carried.out using more rigorous techniques. Furthermore,.apart from the increases in tigers in a few reserves in.India and parts of Thailand, there are no convincing.data to show that populations are recovering in the.rest of Southeast Asia or Russia. Indeed, countries.such as Cambodia, Vietnam and China have lost their.viable tiger populations in recent years—losses.masked by any single global tiger number..Speculative tiger numbers for countries and.regions undermine efforts to save tigers by distracting.conservationists and the public from what should be.our top priority: guarding and growing the source.populations.^2 In a way, the overall number of wild.tigers, if we could even get an accurate count, may not.matter. The source populations are the ones we need.to monitor vigilantly, using the best science available.to track their numbers. Only with reliable counts can.we set realistic goals for future growth, develop.suitable strategies for meeting those goals and.measure the impact of our conservation efforts..(^1) Animal droppings.(^2) Animals located in areas with suitable conditions for reproduction.to take place.History shows that scientific progress can stall.from lack of understanding, institutional inertia and.political considerations for decades or even centuries..But as the world enters into the sixth mass extinction.of wild species, we simply cannot afford to divorce.conservation practices from sound science if we are to.have any hope of saving a wildlife icon like the.majestic tiger.Q: Which choice best states the relationship between the two passages? Answer Choices: (A)Passage 2 compares and critiques the conservation solutions recommended in Passage 1. (B)Passage 2 questions the professional credibility of the scientists profiled in Passage 1. (C)Passage 2 suggests several applications of the conclusions reached in Passage 1. (D)Passage 2 challenges the reliability of research results discussed in Passage 1.
A: Among A through D, the answer is
(A)Passage 2 compares and critiques the conservation solutions recommended in Passage 1.
(B)Passage 2 questions the professional credibility of the scientists profiled in Passage 1.
(C)Passage 2 suggests several applications of the conclusions reached in Passage 1.
(D)Passage 2 challenges the reliability of research results discussed in Passage 1.
Answer: 3