In the past century the steady growth of the human population and the corresponding increase in agriculture and pesticide use have caused much harm to wildlife in the United States birds in particular Unfortunately for birds these trends are likely to con

According to the passage, population growth with contributing agricultural development negatively affected some species, especially the birds, and this will continue. However, the professor disagrees that the text claimed this result occurred because of three reasons and gives compelling examples to oppose.

First of all, the text says as population and settlements expand, the birds' natural habitats are getting smaller. Besides that, the traditional suitable areas decrease so it may continue to decline in the future. but on the other hand, the professor says urban development provides better habitats indeed. She gives the example of observed pray birds in the city, and they could hunt pigeons. Unfortunately, meanwhile, some populations shrink, others grow.

Second, the professor is against the growth of agriculture by destroying habitats, and the wilderness areas converted farming will continue; due to the need to convert fields is decreasing. By the novel techniques, there is more productivity in crops. Currently, agriculture is not in the way assumed in the text.

Third, insect poisons called chemical pesticides use does not increase as claimed as in the passage. traditional pesticides have drawbacks in nature and birds' life, but in the modern age, farmers do not often use pesticides since the genetically engineered pest-resistant developed. These pest-resistant crop technologies do not harm the birds so that the decline won't continue.