TPO48 Integrated Writing

How to solve the problem of the population decline in frog species is the focus of both the writer and the professor. In the writing, three methods, including prohibiting the use of pesticides, applying antifungal treatment, and protecting frog habitats, have been elaborated. The professor, however, claims that none of those approaches are practical.

As opposed to the writer's idea that laws preventing farmers from using baneful pesticides would reduce the harm cause to frogs, the professor states that the advice is not economically fair to farmers. She advances the theory by saying that farmers live in that area would be put at a disadvantage compared to other famers if they have to follow such regulations, because they would harvest fewer crops than they expect.

The professor continues to discredit the writing's assertion that antifungal meditation and treatments should be applied to kill the fungus that harm frogs, by examining the fact that such method is complicated and expensive. In detail, she points out that it would be difficult to apply treatments to every individual frog and those treatments do not stop frogs from spreading diseases to their offspring.

It is the professor's third argument that global warming is the real threat to the frog species instead of habitats threatened by human activities, which contradicts the view of the writer that many frog species would recover if their natural habitats were better protected. To explore deeper, the professor contends that global warming has led to disappearance of many water and wetland habitats, causing the extinction of many species. And preserving natural habitats would not help to solve problems result from global warming.

An apparent divide exists between the writer and the professor on the effectiveness of the three methods of recovering frog populations.