▶ Your Answer : The reading passage claims that US departments have started programs to get rid of Asian carp because they are harmful. However, the lecturer refutes the reading’s description about three strategies to get rid of Asian carp by following the reasons. To begin with, the lecturer’s first arguing point is a building an underwater wall. The speaker asserts the reading’s first strategy of building an underwater wall will be fail. This is because Asian carp can move to the other side by ship. So the lecturer refutes the reading’s assertion that Asian carp cannot cross over to the other side and jump due to an underwater wall. Top of that, the lecturer’s second arguing point is population. The speaker insists the reading’s second strategy of building electrical barrier to prevent the carp from going into the Great Lakes will be fail. According to the speaker’s assertion, the small fishes can swim through the barrier’s hole. In addition, when they grow up, they can be reproduced. So the lecturer refutes the reading’s proposition that electrical barrier not only prevent Asian carp from going into the Lakes but also kill carp due to its’ fence. Finally, the lecturer’s last arguing point is two-step method. The speaker claims that the reading’s last strategy of killing Asian carp and reintroduce other local species will be dangerous. This is because no one predict what will be happening by poison. It means the poison could affect other fishes negatively. Furthermore, It can pollute lakes. So the lecturer refutes the reading’s assertion that the ecosystem of the Great Lakes can be kept intact and healthy due to two – step method. In sum, while the reading passage insists that the Asian carp can be gotten rid of by above three strategies, the lecturer refutes the points made in the reading. |