Passage Summary: Activists want to stop putting cable lines on power poles because they help animals climb up and get shocked. The columnist argues this reasoning is flawed because animals still get shocked even when there are no cable lines on the poles.

Conclusion: The argument for banning the practice of stringing cable TV lines on power poles is unsuccessful.

Reasoning: Animals are still electrocuted by power lines in areas where cable TV lines are buried underground rather than strung on poles.

Analysis: The columnist is guilty of a classic logical oversight: assuming that because a problem exists without a certain factor, that factor cannot be a cause of the problem. Just because animals get electrocuted in other ways doesn't mean cable lines don't make the situation worse or more frequent. You should look for an answer choice that points out that a condition can contribute to an outcome without being the sole or necessary cause of it. It's a bit like saying umbrellas don't work because people still get wet in the shower.