Tpo 17

The reading passage and the lecturer are both about the decline of the birds' population. Within this context, the author of the reading passage points out that as the human population grows, it will have negative effects on the birds' population and describes three of them. The professor, in contrast, casts doubt and argues that the author's claims are not convincing and provides three reasons to challenges them.

To begin with, the article avers that the natural habitats of birds will decrease because of the steady increase of the human population. Moreover, people will use the forests and grasslands to build buildings, malls, and others. The spokeswoman, on the contrary, argues that the increase of the human population would shrink the population of some birds, but it is beneficial for other kinds of birds and increases their population. For instance, landfills and seagulls' population develop. Therefore, creating new buildings does cause undesirable effects.

Second, the essay declares that more land will be used for agricultural activities because of the increasing human population, and it will distract birds' habitats. The audio, on the other hand, claims that people use less land per year that will not have a considerable effect on overall. Additionally, recently people have improved some methods to get the most benefit from fewer lands and to grow the most productive crops. As a result, they will not need to use big fields for agriculture.

Third, the writer of the reading contends that with the increase of agricultural lands farmers will use chemicals to control the production. Furthermore, the chemicals unintentionally will be added to water and by drinking the contaminated water birds will be killed. The narrator, however, states that, nowadays, people are informed about the negative influence of chemicals and they use far less. Also, they use more pest-resistant crops that, in this way, they do not need to use chemicals.