Q16
1 markMCQSection A

2.(vii) What ecological issues can result from too many tourists visiting eco-tourism sites ? (A) reduced carbon emissions and habitat restoration (B) innovation and improved infrastructure (C) erosion, habitat disruption and pollution (D) cultural revival and increased bio-diversity

Reading Comprehension
Ecological issues from too many tourists

Options

(A)reduced carbon emissions and habitat restoration
(B)innovation and improved infrastructure
(C)erosion, habitat disruption and pollution
(D)cultural revival and increased bio-diversity
Official Answer

(C) erosion, habitat disruption and pollution — the only option naming genuine ecological harms, matching Paragraph 5 exactly.

erosionhabitat disruptionpollutiontoo many touristsstrain ecosystemsecological issuesoption C

Marking Scheme

  • 11 mark for selecting option (C) erosion, habitat disruption and pollution.
  • 2No marks for any option describing benefits (A, B, D).

Hint

The question asks for ecological problems (negatives) — find the harm words in Paragraph 5, not the benefits.

Quick Oral Answer

Too many tourists cause erosion, habitat disruption and pollution, so the correct option is (C); the other choices all list benefits, not ecological harms.

Analysis & Explanation

This single-answer MCQ checks literal comprehension of Paragraph 5's list of ecological harms from over-tourism.


Concept

  • The question asks for 'ecological issues' (negative effects), so any option listing benefits must be a distractor.

Key points

  • Paragraph 5 states too many tourists cause erosion, habitat disruption and pollution — exactly Option (C).

Common mistakes

  • Selecting (A), (B) or (D) because they sound positive ('reduced emissions', 'improved infrastructure', 'increased biodiversity') — all describe benefits, not the harms the question asks about.

Real-world

  • Over-tourism damage (erosion, habitat loss, pollution) is why destinations now enforce visitor caps and carrying-capacity limits.

Common Mistakes

  1. 1Picking a benefit-sounding option (A or D) because the passage is broadly positive about eco-tourism.
  2. 2Confusing economic gains like 'improved infrastructure' (B) with ecological issues.
  3. 3Overlooking the word 'issues/problems' in the question and choosing the opposite of harm.

Interesting Facts

Trampling by hikers is a real cause of soil erosion on popular trails — some national parks now use boardwalks and rotating trail closures to let ground recover.

Marine eco-tourism hotspots have seen coral damaged by boat anchors and sunscreen chemicals, a concrete example of tourist-caused pollution.

The IUCN warns that unmanaged wildlife tourism can disrupt animal feeding and breeding — a direct form of the 'habitat disruption' named in the passage.

Spotted a mistake or something unclear?

Tell us — we fix reported answers fast.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why isn't option (D) correct if biodiversity relates to nature?

Option (D) says 'increased bio-diversity', which is a positive outcome. The passage says over-tourism causes habitat disruption — a loss for nature — so (D) is the opposite of the ecological harm asked for.

How do I quickly spot the answer?

Notice the question asks for 'ecological issues' — problems. Scan Paragraph 5 for negative words: erosion, habitat disruption, pollution. Only option (C) lists all three.