▶ Your Answer :
In the reading passage, there is ample support for the author's claim that prairie dogs should be exterminated since they aren't beneficial, or rather harmful in various fields. However, the professor in the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author's point.
First of all, the professor contends that the prairie dogs prevent soil erosion. To explain, soil erosion happens due to the rain running on the surface of the soil. However, these animals make the soil looser, which leads to the easier penetration of ground, thus making the erosion less likely to occur. This casts doubt on the reading passage's claim that prairie dogs which dig burrows damage land and lead to the breaking of land.
Next, the professor insists that these squirrels do not spread fatal illnesses. He says that most of the diseases which are known to be fatal are originally from other rodents such as rats. The professor also proclaimed that the prairie dogs avoid people, therefore having no physical contact. This counters the reading passage's assertion that these creatures spread sickness such as bulbonic plague, and are prone to bite human.
Finally, the professor argues that prairie dogs help raise the nutritional value of the crops. He avows that the nutrients of the plants turn richer when these small animals eat them. This refutes the reading passage's suggestion that prairie dogs consume too much of the grass, lading less income to those who raise livestocks such as cattle and other herbivores.
To sum up, the lecture states that Prairie dogs are not a harm, but are useful animals to the environment and people. This casts suspicion to the reading's claim. |