Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough, at

Argument states that purported decline in deer populations is the result of the deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. Premise given for argument is that Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt. Since author did not consider some crucial assumptions which entails that argument is not well sound, not logically convincing as well as unreasonable.

First assumption argument assumes that according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. This create dubious that may be hunters were killing deers because they were surviving on deer food, places under which hunters live are secluded having reliance on killing animals for food but author did not give any elucidation regarding this assumption. He simply assumes that recent global warming trends are only one driving this phenomena.

Second assumption argument presents that ice to cover the sea separating the islands is possible. Author did not explain this assumption. Sea is broad as well as having high swallow depth and what about distances between islands. Some times islands are not in proximity, may be they have great distance between them now author thinks that covering with ice will make deer comfortable for having food which is nothing more than childish talk.

Third assumption argument omits that declining population of deer may be because of other reason. Most islands are having scarcity of plants and some of them are highly noxious and are capable of killing humans as well as animals. It is possible that deers were feeding on these plants and consequence was that deer population encountered declination but in argument no information is given related about plants whether they are favorable to deer or not.

Ultimately, argument is totally ineffective as well as unsound. Because author did not consider assumptions listed above. Evidence for supporting argument is that Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt does little for endorsement. Finally argument can be strengthened by claiming that plants on which deer were feeding, were viable to them and distances between islands are not too much, are in proximity of each other and hunters are not hunting deers, they are not responsible for declining deer population.