When of the following statement is true according to the passage?

  When man evolved a conscience, his basic relationship with the other animals began to change. Until then, they were broadly divided into those which ate him when they got the chance, those which he ate when he got the chance and a third group which completed with him for food, or was otherwise a nuisance to him in the business of keeping alive.

  In the primitive situation, man was, therefore, basically against Nature but, as the battle was progressively won, conscience crept in: the awareness of responsibility, and a failure to meet it, produced feelings of guilt. Those who live in cities and need no longer do battle against Nature are nowadays most actively for Nature.

At this time, something like a thousand kinds of animals (vertebrate animals) can be said to be in danger of extinction. A few of them have been reduced to this precarious position by extensive killing but the majority are disappearing only as fast as the particular kind of country they need for existence is itself disappearing: and all this is at the hands of man, as often as not by mistake.

There are three species of turtles whose future survival is manaced by the demand for turtle soup, which would hardly justify the extermination of a giant reptile whose family has existed for 200 million years. Leopards are in jeopardy because of the fashion for their skins. As they get rare, the prices rise and as leopard skin coats become more expensive, the demand increases. No species can long survive the price of #60,000 which a half-grown baby leopard now carries on its skin. And crocodiles, the longest surviving reptiles, are now dwindling alarmingly as a result of the fashion in crocodile skin for ladies ‘handbags and men’s shoes.

  The human population explosion spreads mankind across the land surfaces of the earth at an alarming rate. There will be twice as many of us before most of us are dead. Does this mean no room for wild animals? Of course not. With ingenuity and forethought, a place can be kept for them. To destroy their habitat is as unnecessary as it would be to pull down a great cathedral in order to grow potatoes on the site. A campaign to save what remains is the concern of a new kind of Noah’s Ark- the World Wildlife Fund. It does not believe that all is lost.