/  0034 616 39 58 80   contact@englishaula.com



You are given a piece of text with six questions.

You are also given a set 4 choices  for each question.

Identify the correct option by clicking on it.


Once all the questions have been answered, click on the check button.

Correct answers will appear in green, incorrect answers in red.

Your mark will be given as a percentage.


The pass mark for this exercise is 60% or over and you need to be able to do this exercise in the exam in about 10 minutes.
(A timer is given here to help you.)

10:00 min.

Nobel prize of conservation

A Welsh biologist Q.1 once criticised for stealing eggs from the nests of the rarest bird in the world has been awarded the 'Nobel prize' of conservation after his controversial methods saved nine species from extinction. Professor Carl Jones won the 2016 Indianapolis Prize - the highest accolade in the field of animal conservation - for his 40 years of work in Mauritius, where he saved an endangered kestrel from becoming the next Dodo.

When the 61-year-old first travelled to the east African island in the 1970s he was told to close down a project to save the Mauritius kestrel. At the time Q.2 there were just four left in the wild, making it the rarest bird on Earth. However he stayed, implementing the controversial techniques of captive breeding and a strategy known as double-clutching, which involved snatching eggs from the birds' nests and hatching them under incubators, prompting the mothers to lay another set of eggs in the wild.

A decade later, the number of Mauritius kestrels had soared to over 300 and today there are around 400 in the wild. Q.3 The biologist has also been integral in efforts to bring other rare species back from the brink of extinction, including the pink pigeon, echo parakeet and Rodrigues warbler.

He is credited with championing the idea of ecological replacement, which is a conservation tactic in which other species fill in important ecological roles once held by extinct species. Prof. Jones, originally from St Clears, near Carmarthen, was awarded the $250,000 prize at a ceremony at the Natural History Museum in London.

Reflecting on the start of his career, he said the Mauritius kestrel project had been seen as a dead loss at the time. Q.5 He had originally gone out there for one or possible two years only to be told to pull out of the project and hand it over to the locals. At the time they didn't have the money or expertise to do it so that would essentially have meant closing it down.

In the 1970s there was fierce opposition to the captive breeding techniques, with critics arguing that they were too risky and took the emphasis off breeding in the wild. But the biologist, now chief scientist of the Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust and scientific director of the Mauritian Wildlife Foundation, said the method of taking eggs from the nests had worked exceedingly well.

Prof. Jones has dedicated his whole life to his work, only becoming a father for the first time eight years ago, at 53. He said receiving the prize was particularly important to him because Q.6 it vindicated his work to save birds, whereas previous winners have tended to concentrate on more high profile species, like polar bears or elephants.

The Tribune


1) In the first paragraph, the writer's intention is to draw a contrast between

  • A) how different parts of society see conservation.
  • B) how geographical perspectives affect conservation.
  • C) the way different species are treated.
  • D) past and present circumstances.


2) How does the writer describe the plight of the Mauritius kestrel in the second paragraph?

  • A) Desperate.
  • B) Promising.
  • C) Predictable.
  • D) Surprising.


3) How does the writer feel about Professor Jones' influence on other endangered species?

  • A) He was the source of unnecessary conflict.
  • B) His participation was indispensable.
  • C) His ideas were considered unorthodox.
  • D) He was thought to be too selective.


4) What does the writer mean with the word championing in paragraph 4?

  • A) Choosing one species over another.
  • B) Projecting a 'win at any cost' mentality.
  • C) Being the driving force.
  • D) Having an inclusive attitude.

5) In what way does the writer feel the professor was let down in the fifth paragraph?

  • A) He wasn't give his due respect.
  • B) The money he was promised never materialised.
  • C) His living conditions were not acceptable.
  • D) The duration of the project was altered abruptly.


6) What conclusions does the professor draw from winning the prize in the seventh paragraph?

  • A) He felt justified in saving a less publicised group.
  • B) The pride his family felt made the suffering worthwhile.
  • C) He appreciated finally being considered important.
  • D) He understood how fortunate he was.