Aquaculture bettween an article and a lecture

The reading and lecture both deal with a way people is introducing to solve the problem of overfishing and pollution, that is to say, aquaculture. The writer of the reading feels that this actity should be used in the fishing industry. However, the lecturer challenges this idea by providing reasons from a recent study. He is the opinion that aquaculte should not be adopted. To begin with, the author argues that aquaculture is a way to take care of coastal area due to the fact the workers are going to keep the farms clean, Furthermore, it is stated on the article that this technique will prevent pollution. On the other hand, this argument is challenged by the lecturer when says that aquaculte affects negatively ecosystems. He goes deeper when he mentions the mango forest, that is nedeed to prevent erosion and, on the contraty, aquaculture is destroying it. Second, the reading suggest that aquaculture will help people to find jobs and decrease the rates of unemployment. On top of that, the author mantains that an skilled an sophistical techinques are not nedeed, so whoever wants to help, can do it. Nevertheless, the lecturer call this argument into cuestion by proposing an hypothetical situation where a lot of person are working there, relying on fish to eat and obtain money. So on, he asks if each farm will be enough to give employment. Last, it is stated in the reading that farms will eliminate pressures on wild fishes. So on, it is remarked that it will reduce the actual need of fishing. Even so, the lecturer holds that fish will have the need to eat so they are going to convert in wild animals and increase the wild fishing.