In the set of materials, the writer strongly postulates that methods taken into consideration, in order to stop the immense growth of the cane frogs in Australia would be successful and provides
three examples to endorse his idea. On the other hand, the professor states that the measures suggested for eradication of cane frogs either would be unsuccessful or would damage the current scenario even more.
First and foremost, the passage begins by asserting that using an already proven strategy for other rodents will be successful, as constructing a broad fence along the country will prevent the advancement of cane toads in the areas where their growth has not been seen yet. Nonetheless, the lecture maintains that building a national fence would not stop the propagation of frog species because
frogs use the water passages of streams and rivers for their spread and streamflow could not be controlled, hence there are chances the cane frog population will increase too.
Next, the professor in the lecture further points out that untrained volunteers would destroy the Native Australian frog species as they will be unable to distinguish between the two species, and thus they could harm the endangered species of frogs in Australia. These claims refute the writer's implication that the government should start a campaign to motivate the volunteers to help in the eradication of cane frogs and this collaboration would be fruitful for diminishing the harmful toads.
Ultimately, the article wraps its argument by declaring that researchers are in the process to develop a virus which will be an asset in controlling the cane frog's spread as it will only kill the cane frogs and will not be harmful to most of the other species. The speaker in the listening rebuts this point by insisting that it would have a terrible impact on the Natural habitat of cane frogs, as, when virus infected frogs were transported to the central and south America, their natural habitat, the virus would infect the remaining population of there and it results in severe ecological diturbances.
In the set of materials, the writer
strongly
postulates that methods taken into consideration, in order to
stop
the immense growth of the
cane
frogs
in Australia would be successful and provides
three
examples to endorse his
idea
.
On the other hand
, the professor states that the measures suggested for eradication of
cane
frogs
either would be unsuccessful or would damage the
current
scenario even more.
First
and foremost, the passage
begins
by asserting that using an already proven strategy for other rodents will be successful, as constructing a broad fence along the country will
prevent
the advancement of
cane
toads in the areas where their growth has not been
seen
yet
. Nonetheless, the lecture maintains that building a national fence would not
stop
the propagation of
frog
species
because
frogs
use
the water passages of streams and rivers for their spread and
streamflow
could not
be controlled
,
hence
there are chances the
cane
frog
population will increase too.
Next
, the professor in the lecture
further
points out that untrained volunteers would
destroy
the Native Australian
frog
species as they will be unable to distinguish between the two species, and
thus
they could harm the endangered species of
frogs
in Australia. These claims refute the writer's implication that the
government
should
start
a campaign to motivate the volunteers to
help
in the eradication of
cane
frogs
and this collaboration would be fruitful for diminishing the harmful toads.
Ultimately
, the article wraps its argument by declaring that researchers are in the process to develop a virus which will be an asset in controlling the
cane
frog's spread as it will
only
kill the
cane
frogs
and will not be harmful to most of the other species. The speaker in the listening rebuts this point by insisting that it would have a terrible impact on the Natural habitat of
cane
frogs
, as, when virus infected
frogs
were transported
to the central and
south America
, their natural habitat, the virus would infect the remaining population of there and it results in severe ecological
diturbances
.