The Florida panther, known for its distinctive characteristics, including a kinked tail and cowlicks, is nearing extinction with the help...
GMAT Reading Comprehension : (RC) Questions
The Florida panther, known for its distinctive characteristics, including a kinked tail and cowlicks, is nearing extinction with the help of scientists and government officials. Though once abundant in Florida, by the end of the twentieth century, only approximately 30 Florida panthers remained. Efforts to preserve the panthers had focused on shielding them from human encroachment with the hope that they could develop sustainable numbers to survive as a species. However, pressure from development caused officials to grow impatient and shift their strategy and goals.
In 1995, new breeds of female panthers were brought to Florida from Texas to bolster the population. The change has been dramatic. In 1990, 88% of the panthers in Florida had the distinct kinked tail. By 2000, five years after the introduction of the Texas panthers, not a single kitten born to the Texas females had a kinked tail. The breed known as the Florida panther is now on an expedited, ineluctable road to extinction with the assistance of wildlife protection agencies. If the goal was to have any kind of panther in Florida, it has been realized. Since the introduction of the Texas panthers, the panther population in Florida has risen to approximately 80 mixed-breed panthers. However, this "success" could portend a tragic trend in wildlife management in the United States. We cannot and should not create genetically mixed species as a means of achieving a compromise between the needs of development and a species survival. This type of species tampering is a perversion of the ideal of wildlife management and will irrevocably transform our national landscape.
The primary goal of this passage is to
1. Passage Analysis:
Progressive Passage Analysis
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| The Florida panther, known for its distinctive characteristics, including a kinked tail and cowlicks, is nearing extinction with the help of scientists and government officials. | What it says: Florida panthers have unique features (kinked tail, cowlicks) and are almost extinct, and surprisingly, scientists/officials are actually helping cause this extinction. What it does: Introduces the main subject and sets up a paradox - the very people who should be saving the panthers are contributing to their extinction. Source/Type: Author's statement presenting a controversial claim. Connection to Previous Sentences: This is our opening - establishes the central tension of the passage. Visualization: Imagine scientists and government workers unintentionally pushing a species toward extinction while trying to help. Reading Strategy Insight: Notice the unexpected phrase "with the help of" - this signals the author's critical perspective from the very beginning. |
2. Passage Summary:
Author's Purpose:
To criticize wildlife management officials for using genetic mixing as a conservation strategy and warn against this becoming a widespread practice in American wildlife management.
Main Point:
Wildlife management agencies should never create genetically mixed species as a compromise between development pressure and species survival, as this approach destroys the original species while appearing to solve the conservation problem.
Why It's Wrong:
• The passage does mention panther fragility, but this is background information, not the primary goal
• The author's focus is on criticizing the solution officials chose, not demonstrating the problem itself
• The fragility of panthers is established quickly (sentences 1-2) then the passage moves to arguing against genetic mixing
Why It's Wrong:
• The author actually criticizes current wildlife management rather than demonstrating its importance
• The passage calls genetic mixing "a perversion of the ideal of wildlife management"
• The author warns this approach will "irrevocably transform our national landscape" negatively
Why It's Right:
• The author explicitly states "We cannot and should not create genetically mixed species"
• The entire Florida panther example serves to support this argument
• The author calls genetic mixing "a perversion of the ideal of wildlife management"
• The passage structure builds from specific case to general principle against this practice
Key Evidence: "We cannot and should not create genetically mixed species as a means of achieving a compromise between the needs of development and a species survival."
Why It's Wrong:
• The author explicitly criticizes the genetic mixing approach, not demonstrates its effectiveness
• The author puts "success" in quotation marks to show skepticism
• While population increased, the author argues this destroyed the original species
Why It's Wrong:
• Development pressure is mentioned as context for why officials made their decision, not as the main focus
• The author doesn't advocate for limiting development as the solution
• The primary criticism is about the genetic mixing response, not about development itself