CAT ARTICLE DOSE – 31

Discussions in human geography about the social construction of landscapes have led to the exploration of how
animals and their networks leave their imprint on places, regions, and landscapes over time. Animal geographers
consider tangible places such as zoos, farms, experimental laboratories, and wildlife reserves as well as
economic, social, and political spaces such as the worldwide trade of captive wild animals. Even a relatively new
space through which animals are woven into human culture, the “electronic zoo,” has been explored as an
emerging form of animal display trading in digital images rather than animal bodies like traditional zoos and
aquariums.

Animal geographers also study places characterized by the presence or absence of animals and how human–
animal interactions create distinctive landscapes. Researchers have considered the impact of land use practices
on wildlife survival in the Peruvian Amazon, the boundary-making policy conflicts between urban and rural New
Yorkers over the proper place of wolves, and the changing relationships between people and mountain lions in
California. In addition, some animal geographers foreground the links between humans and other animals—
those used for meat, medicine, clothing, and beauty products, for example—that go largely unseen in
contemporary society given the distance engendered by modern commodity chains. Other researchers focus on
domesticated animals that share the most intimate spaces with humans, including beloved family pets and
service animals. Borderland communities, where humans and animals share public and/or private space and
where some animals are loved, others are despised, and so many are unconsciously consumed, reveal the
contingent and often contradictory ways in which humans and animals interact with one another.

Borderland communities can span various places and spaces. Investigating human–dolphin encounter spaces,
for example, requires a look at the well-defined boundaries of zoos and aquariums, where dolphins are confined
and cared for by humans, as well as natural habitats, where a growing number of tourism operators seek out
dolphins to sell a “magical experience” to customers who wish to closely interact with, or even touch and swim
with, wild dolphins. On the other hand, U.S. government officials strive for just the opposite, calling such activities
illegal “harassment” and working to keep people a defined distance apart from all wild dolphins. And how do the
dolphins encourage or defy the human ordering of these border waters? Each of these material places, from the
zoo and the open ocean to the economic and policy arenas considered by investigating human–dolphin
encounter spaces, helps illuminate the complex relationships between human and nonhuman worlds.

Breaking from the traditional geographic approach to animals, contemporary animal geographers think about
nonhuman animals as more than simple biotic elements of ecological systems. Not only are animals appreciated
as foundational to countless cultural norms and practices, they also are valued as individuals with mental and
emotional lives. Thus, animal geographers call for a more theoretically inclusive approach to thinking about
humans and animals; both are considered to be embedded in social relations and networks with others on whom
their social welfare depends. Such thinking suggests a reconceptualization of the human–animal divide that
portrays humans as vastly different from (and superior to) animals and points instead toward a continuum that
allows for a “kinship” with animals while still acknowledging the differences between humans and other animals.

Animal geographies also encourage thinking about animal agency and subjectivity, recognizing that animals have
intentions and are communicative subjects with potential viewpoints, desires, and projects of their own. For
example, some animal geographers suggest that nonhuman animals are best seen as “strange persons” or as
marginalized, socially excluded people. But because animals cannot organize and challenge human activities for
themselves, animal geographers recognize that animals require human representatives to speak and act in their
interests.

[Turn to the next page to check your comprehension & analysis]

Page 1 of 7
PASSAGE DETAILS
• Source: Encylopedia of Human Geography, Edited by Barney Warf.
• Length of the Extract: 619 words
• Flesch Kincaid Grade Level: 17.7
• Genre: Animal Geography, Social Sciences

MIND MAPS

After carefully reading the passage, evaluate your understanding through the following exercises:

1. Comprehension Check: This part is focused on identifying and summarising the main ideas in the passage.
Look for pivotal sentences or groups of sentences that encapsulate the core themes in each paragraph.
Summarise these main ideas using your own words. Your goal is to capture the essence of the passage
accurately.

2. Reasoning Check: In this part, you’ll engage with questions centred on inference and critical reasoning.
These questions will require you to analyse the logic and arguments presented in the passage and make
inferential deductions. Reflect on the strength of the reasoning, assess the evidence provided, and evaluate if
the conclusions drawn are well-supported.

Upon completing each exercise, review the provided answers to gauge your comprehension and reasoning
performance. This is a valuable opportunity to enhance your critical reading skills.”

Page 2 of 7
COMPREHENSION CHECK
“In this exercise, your task is to identify the key sentence or group of sentences in each paragraph that best encapsulates
its main idea. Once you’ve identified these, provide a concise summary of the principal theme or message conveyed in each
paragraph. Remember, your goal is to effectively distil the essence of the paragraph using the key sentences and your own
summarisation.”
KEY IDEA
[1] Discussions in human geography about the social construction of landscapes have led to the
exploration of how animals and their networks leave their imprint on places, regions, and
landscapes over time. [2] Animal geographers consider tangible places such as zoos, farms,
experimental laboratories, and wildlife reserves as well as economic, social, and political spaces
such as the worldwide trade of captive wild animals. [3] Even a relatively new space through which
animals are woven into human culture, the “electronic zoo,” has been explored as an emerging
form of animal display trading in digital images rather than animal bodies like traditional zoos and
aquariums.

[4] Animal geographers also study places characterized by the presence or absence of animals
and how human–animal interactions create distinctive landscapes. [5] Researchers have
considered the impact of land use practices on wildlife survival in the Peruvian Amazon, the
boundary-making policy conflicts between urban and rural New Yorkers over the proper place of
wolves, and the changing relationships between people and mountain lions in California. [6] In
addition, some animal geographers foreground the links between humans and other animals—
those used for meat, medicine, clothing, and beauty products, for example—that go largely unseen
in contemporary society given the distance engendered by modern commodity chains. [7] Other
researchers focus on domesticated animals that share the most intimate spaces with humans,
including beloved family pets and service animals. [8] Borderland communities, where humans and
animals share public and/or private space and where some animals are loved, others are despised,
and so many are unconsciously consumed, reveal the contingent and often contradictory ways in
which humans and animals interact with one another.

[9] Borderland communities can span various places and spaces. [10] Investigating human–dolphin
encounter spaces, for example, requires a look at the well-defined boundaries of zoos and
aquariums, where dolphins are confined and cared for by humans, as well as natural habitats,
where a growing number of tourism operators seek out dolphins to sell a “magical experience” to
customers who wish to closely interact with, or even touch and swim with, wild dolphins. [11] On
the other hand, U.S. government officials strive for just the opposite, calling such activities illegal
“harassment” and working to keep people a defined distance apart from all wild dolphins. [12] And
how do the dolphins encourage or defy the human ordering of these border waters? [13] Each of
these material places, from the zoo and the open ocean to the economic and policy arenas
considered by investigating human–dolphin encounter spaces, helps illuminate the complex
relationships between human and nonhuman worlds.

[14] Breaking from the traditional geographic approach to animals, contemporary animal
geographers think about nonhuman animals as more than simple biotic elements of ecological
systems. [15] Not only are animals appreciated as foundational to countless cultural norms and
practices, they also are valued as individuals with mental and emotional lives. [16] Thus, animal
geographers call for a more theoretically inclusive approach to thinking about humans and animals;
both are considered to be embedded in social relations and networks with others on whom their
social welfare depends. [17] Such thinking suggests a reconceptualization of the human–animal
divide that portrays humans as vastly different from (and superior to) animals and points instead
toward a continuum that allows for a “kinship” with animals while still acknowledging the
differences between humans and other animals.

[18] Animal geographies also encourage thinking about animal agency and subjectivity,
recognizing that animals have intentions and are communicative subjects with potential viewpoints,
desires, and projects of their own. [19] For example, some animal geographers suggest that
nonhuman animals are best seen as “strange persons” or as marginalized, socially excluded
people. [20] But because animals cannot organize and challenge human activities for themselves,
animal geographers recognize that animals require human representatives to speak and act in their
interests.

[Check your answers on the next page]

Page 3 of 7
 KEY IDEA
[1] Discussions in human geography about the social construction of landscapes have led to the Animal geographers study
exploration of how animals and their networks leave their imprint on places, regions, and tangible and abstract spaces
landscapes over time. [2] Animal geographers consider tangible places such as zoos, farms, where animals have an impact on
experimental laboratories, and wildlife reserves as well as economic, social, and political spaces human landscapes and cultures,
such as the worldwide trade of captive wild animals. [3] Even a relatively new space through which even including digital spaces like
animals are woven into human culture, the “electronic zoo,” has been explored as an emerging the "electronic zoo",
form of animal display trading in digital images rather than animal bodies like traditional zoos and
aquariums.

[4] Animal geographers also study places characterized by the presence or absence of animals The study includes how human-
and how human–animal interactions create distinctive landscapes. [5] Researchers have animal interactions create distinct
considered the impact of land use practices on wildlife survival in the Peruvian Amazon, the landscapes and how these
boundary-making policy conflicts between urban and rural New Yorkers over the proper place of interactions differ based on the
wolves, and the changing relationships between people and mountain lions in California. [6] In type and purpose of the animals
addition, some animal geographers foreground the links between humans and other animals— involved
those used for meat, medicine, clothing, and beauty products, for example—that go largely unseen
in contemporary society given the distance engendered by modern commodity chains. [7] Other
researchers focus on domesticated animals that share the most intimate spaces with humans,
including beloved family pets and service animals. [8] Borderland communities, where humans and
animals share public and/or private space and where some animals are loved, others are despised,
and so many are unconsciously consumed, reveal the contingent and often contradictory ways in
which humans and animals interact with one another.

[9] Borderland communities can span various places and spaces. [10] Investigating human–dolphin The concept of borderland
encounter spaces, for example, requires a look at the well-defined boundaries of zoos and communities, spaces shared by
aquariums, where dolphins are confined and cared for by humans, as well as natural habitats, humans and animals, helps
where a growing number of tourism operators seek out dolphins to sell a “magical experience” to illuminate complex human-animal
customers who wish to closely interact with, or even touch and swim with, wild dolphins. [11] On relationships.
the other hand, U.S. government officials strive for just the opposite, calling such activities illegal
“harassment” and working to keep people a defined distance apart from all wild dolphins. [12] And
how do the dolphins encourage or defy the human ordering of these border waters? [13] Each of
these material places, from the zoo and the open ocean to the economic and policy arenas
considered by investigating human–dolphin encounter spaces, helps illuminate the complex
relationships between human and nonhuman worlds.

[14] Breaking from the traditional geographic approach to animals, contemporary animal Animal geographers are now
geographers think about nonhuman animals as more than simple biotic elements of ecological advocating for a view of animals
systems. [15] Not only are animals appreciated as foundational to countless cultural norms and as social beings, not just
practices, they also are valued as individuals with mental and emotional lives. [16] Thus, animal ecological elements, suggesting a
geographers call for a more theoretically inclusive approach to thinking about humans and animals; need to rethink the human-animal
both are considered to be embedded in social relations and networks with others on whom their divide
social welfare depends. [17] Such thinking suggests a reconceptualization of the human–animal
divide that portrays humans as vastly different from (and superior to) animals and points instead
toward a continuum that allows for a “kinship” with animals while still acknowledging the
differences between humans and other animals.

[18] Animal geographies also encourage thinking about animal agency and subjectivity, The field encourages recognizing
recognizing that animals have intentions and are communicative subjects with potential viewpoints, animal agency and subjectivity,
desires, and projects of their own. [19] For example, some animal geographers suggest that and acknowledges that animals
nonhuman animals are best seen as “strange persons” or as marginalized, socially excluded need human representation due
people. [20] But because animals cannot organize and challenge human activities for themselves, to their inability to advocate for
animal geographers recognize that animals require human representatives to speak and act in their themselves.
interests.

[More Analysis on the next page]

Page 4 of 7
Central Theme: The central theme of this passage is "Animal Geography," an exploration of the complex relationships
between humans and animals and the impact these relationships have on our landscapes and societies.

Tone: The tone of the passage is academic and informative. The author's objective is to describe various perspectives within
the field of animal geography and to argue for a reconceptualization of human-animal relationships..

Structure of the Passage: The passage moves from a general overview of animal geography (Para 1), to specific examples
of human-animal interactions and their impact (Para 2 and 3), to an argument for changing our perspective on animals (Para
4), and finally to a consideration of animal agency and the need for human representatives for animals (Para 5).

[Check your Reasoning on the next page]

Page 5 of 7
REASONING CHECK
Choose the correct interpretation of each of the following sentences:

1. "Borderland communities, where humans and animals share public and/or private space and where some animals are
loved, others are despised, and so many are unconsciously consumed, reveal the contingent and often contradictory
ways in which humans and animals interact with one another."
A) Borderland areas show varied human-animal interactions.
B) In borderlands, animals in general are loved and respected.

2. "Investigating human–dolphin encounter spaces, for example, requires a look at the well-defined boundaries of zoos and
aquariums, where dolphins are confined and cared for by humans, as well as natural habitats, where a growing number
of tourism operators seek out dolphins to sell a “magical experience” to customers who wish to closely interact with, or
even touch and swim with, wild dolphins."
A) Tourism operators selling "magical experiences" with dolphins are the main focus of studying human-dolphin
encounter spaces.
B) Understanding human-dolphin spaces involves studying confined and natural settings.

3. "Each of these material places, from the zoo and the open ocean to the economic and policy arenas considered by
investigating human–dolphin encounter spaces, helps illuminate the complex relationships between human and
nonhuman worlds."
A) Different spaces aid in understanding the complexity of human-nonhuman interactions.
B) Zoos and open oceans are the places that illuminate the complex relationships between humans and nonhumans.

4. "Such thinking suggests a reconceptualization of the human–animal divide that portrays humans as vastly different from
(and superior to) animals and points instead toward a continuum that allows for a “kinship” with animals while still
acknowledging the differences between humans and other animals."
A) The reconceptualization of the human-animal divide denies difference between humans and animals.
B) This line of thought supports rethinking the human-animal divide to consider kinship with animals.

5. "But because animals cannot organize and challenge human activities for themselves, animal geographers recognize
that animals require human representatives to speak and act in their interests."
A) Animal geographers understand that animals need human representatives to advocate for them.
B) Animal geographers work as representatives to advocate for animals.

[Answers of the next page]

Page 6 of 7
6. "Borderland communities, where humans and animals share public and/or private space and where some animals are loved, others
are despised, and so many are unconsciously consumed, reveal the contingent and often contradictory ways in which humans and
animals interact with one another."
C) Borderland areas show varied human-animal interactions.
D) In borderlands, animals in general are loved and respected.

A) Correct. This interpretation correctly and concisely captures the essence of the sentence: human-animal interactions in borderland
communities can vary from love to disdain to unconscious exploitation.
B) Incorrect. This interpretation incorrectly implies that animals in borderland communities are generally loved and respected, which isn't
supported by the sentence.

7. "Investigating human–dolphin encounter spaces, for example, requires a look at the well-defined boundaries of zoos and aquariums,
where dolphins are confined and cared for by humans, as well as natural habitats, where a growing number of tourism operators seek
out dolphins to sell a “magical experience” to customers who wish to closely interact with, or even touch and swim with, wild dolphins."
C) Tourism operators selling "magical experiences" with dolphins are the main focus of studying human-dolphin encounter spaces.
D) Understanding human-dolphin spaces involves studying confined and natural settings.

A) Incorrect. This interpretation incorrectly suggests that tourism operators are the primary focus of these studies, while they're only one
part of the larger picture.
B) Correct. This interpretation accurately captures the essence of the sentence: studying human-dolphin encounter spaces involves both
confined spaces (zoos, aquariums) and natural habitats used by tourism operators.

8. "Each of these material places, from the zoo and the open ocean to the economic and policy arenas considered by investigating
human–dolphin encounter spaces, helps illuminate the complex relationships between human and nonhuman worlds."
C) Different spaces aid in understanding the complexity of human-nonhuman interactions.
D) Zoos and open oceans are the places that illuminate the complex relationships between humans and nonhumans.

A) Correct. This interpretation accurately captures the idea that various spaces, from physical to economic and policy spheres, are
instrumental in understanding human-nonhuman interactions.
B) Incorrect. This interpretation wrongly limits the understanding to zoos and open oceans, while the sentence clearly refers to a broader
range of places, including economic and policy arenas.

9. "Such thinking suggests a reconceptualization of the human–animal divide that portrays humans as vastly different from (and superior
to) animals and points instead toward a continuum that allows for a “kinship” with animals while still acknowledging the differences
between humans and other animals."
C) The reconceptualization of the human-animal divide denies difference between humans and animals.
D) This line of thought supports rethinking the human-animal divide to consider kinship with animals.

A) Incorrect. This interpretation falsely suggests that the reconceptualization denies difference between humans and animals, which is not
supported by the sentence.
B) Correct. This interpretation correctly encapsulates the idea that this thought process supports reimagining the human-animal divide to
allow for a kinship between the two, while still acknowledging the differences.

10. "But because animals cannot organize and challenge human activities for themselves, animal geographers recognize that animals
require human representatives to speak and act in their interests."
C) Animal geographers understand that animals need human representatives to advocate for them.
D) Animal geographers work as representatives to advocate for animals.

A) Correct. This interpretation correctly captures the sentence's meaning that animals need human representatives to advocate for them,
as recognized by animal geographers.
B) Incorrect. This interpretation inaccurately suggests that animal geographers themselves act as representatives for animals, which is not
directly stated in the sentence.

Page 7 of 7