tpo 20.1

The text and lecturer offer two opposing views on the accuracy of hypothesis which illustrates the reasons of replacing "let it burn" policy. While text, based upon the incident at Yellowstone Park in 1988, lists some factors as the main criticizes of this policy, the professor counters these specific points and presents some clues after the big Yellowstone fire to call into question for the information in the reading passage.

First of all, the professor refutes that the fire lead to the bulks damages on the green space of park, which in the reading part is named as one of the factors evoked the critics. The lecturer states that although the fire destroys some vegetation and trees, it prepares a new habitat for novel colonization. For instance, the vast varieties of small plants and vegetation germinate in place of the big trees which incinerated in the fire. Thus, the park possesses a new and various plants.

Next, although the passage uses the surmise of negative impacts on the animals as one of the critic which lead to this conclusion, the professor casts doubts on the truth of this result. As the lecturer asserts the flames and fire have the same influence on the animals as they have on vegetation. By new vegetation the park becomes the new habitats for new spices and they attract new predator to become the dominant in the site. Consequently, new food chain is developed in the park.

Finally, the lecturer argues that the fire has the bad consequence on the tourism and local economy. Meanwhile, the passage presumes this event prohibits the tourists to spend their vacations in this park. Based upon the professor's evidence this event indicated in just one year and its main reason was the lack of rain fall on that duration. Moreover, this incident does not repeat again. In addition, a huge amount of tourists visit this park after that event and they continue this sightseeing every year.