《2026年薪火金卷高考仿真模拟卷英语》

D
Camping in Hong Kong has evolved significantly over time. In the past, it was often associated
with hunting, particularly bird shooting in the Deep Bay area. These days, Hong Kong’s endangered
migratory birds are shot only by photography enthusiasts. Camping has become a popular escape for
urban residents to seek space and privacy from crowded city life. Public campsites require
campers to bring all their own devices, which holds back many potential enthusiasts.
To bridge this gap, privately run “glamping”(豪华露营) sites have emerged, offering pre-
set tents, comfortable bedding, and even showers—appealing to those who want a nature
experience without the trouble. Nevertheless, let us be under no illusions(幻想); as a romantic
way to connect with the outdoors, glamping is ultimately just a night spent outdoors, carefully
marketed towards citizens who might otherwise avoid traditional camping. From South Atlanta to
Kai Po, new glamping venues have mushroomed.
However, the rapid expansion of glamping has raised ecological concerns. Many sites are
developed on rewilded farmland or near country parks, disrupting habitats that had become vital
for local wildlife. Former rice fields and wetlands, once abandoned, had naturally transformed
into thriving ecosystems for birds and insects. Now, these areas are being cleared and sprayed
with pesticides to create “natural-looking” glamping sites.
Under current land use regulations, owners of agricultural lands are unable to easily develop
them into housing. Profitable workarounds must be found. Swift conversion of vacant and
rewilded fields into glamping sites provides a profitable alternative in more accessible areas. As a
result, biodiversity-rich areas are being replaced by commercialized outdoor retreats, ironically
marketed as a return to nature.
While glamping provides urbanites with a convenient outdoor experience, its environmental
cost is significant. The loss of these rewilded spaces threatens Hong Kong’s already fragile
ecosystems, raising questions about whether this trend truly benefits nature or merely exploits it
for profit.
32. What do we know about camping in Hong Kong today?
A. It remains closely tied to hunting activities.
B. It allows photographers to shoot birds.
C. It provides leisure from daily routine.
D. It weakens the campers potential.
33. What is the main feature of “glamping” sites?
A. They focus on traditional camping experiences.
B. They provide necessary equipment for campers.
C. They are targeted to romantic naturalists.
D. They are crowded with mushrooms.
34. What ecological problem has glamping caused?
A. Destruction of rewilded habitats.
B. Decline in agricultural production.
C. Extinction of birds and insects.
D. Increased pollution in country parks.
35. What is the author’s attitude toward the development of glamping?
A. Completely supportive.
B. Cautiously optimistic.
C. Strongly critical.
D. Totally indifferent.

答案： 32. C [推理判断题。根据第一段中的“Camping has become a popular escape for urban residents to seek space and privacy from crowded city life. (露营已经成为城市居民逃离拥挤城市生活、寻求空间和隐私的流行方式。)”可知，露营为人们提供了从日常例行事务中解脱的休闲方式。故选C。]
33. B [细节理解题。根据第二段中的“To bridge this gap, privately run ‘glamping’ (豪华露营) sites have emerged, offering pre - set tents, comfortable bedding, and even showers—appealing to those who want a nature experience without the trouble. (为了弥补这一差距，私人经营的‘豪华露营’地出现了，提供预先搭建好的帐篷，舒适的床上用品，甚至淋浴设备——吸引那些想要轻松体验大自然的人。)”可知，豪华露营地的特点在于为露营者提供必需的设备，为他们带来便利。故选B。]
34. A [细节理解题。根据第三段“However, the rapid expansion of glamping has raised ecological concerns... Now, these areas are being cleared and sprayed with pesticides to create ‘natural - looking’ glamping sites.”可知，然而，豪华露营的迅速扩张引发了生态担忧。许多露营地建在重新野化的农田或国家公园附近，破坏了对当地野生动物至关重要的栖息地。曾经被废弃的稻田和湿地，本已自然演变为鸟类和昆虫繁盛的生态系统，如今却被清理并喷洒农药，以营造“看似原生态”的豪华露营地。由此可知，豪华露营地的开发导致重新野化的废弃农田或郊野公园附近的栖息地被破坏，这些区域原本已成为当地野生动物的重要生存环境，即豪华露营导致重新野化的栖息地遭到破坏。故选A。]
35. C [推理判断题。根据倒数第二段中的“As a result, biodiversity - rich areas are being replaced by commercialized outdoor retreats, ironically marketed as a return to nature. (因此，生物多样性丰富的地区正在被商业化的户外度假地所取代，具有讽刺意义的是，这些度假地被宣传为回归自然。)”和最后一段中的“The loss of these rewilded spaces threatens Hong Kong's already fragile ecosystems, raising questions about whether this trend truly benefits nature or merely exploits it for profit. (这些荒野空间的消失威胁着香港本已脆弱的生态系统，这引发了人们的疑问：这种趋势是真正有益于自然，还是仅仅利用自然牟利。)”可知，作者指出露营地开发破坏自然栖息地，威胁香港脆弱的生态系统，并且揭示了露营商业化的本质，认为其以“回归自然”为营销噱头。由此可知，作者对露营发展的态度是强烈批评的。故选C。]