The world’s forests

The passage and lecture are arguing over whether establishing international funding is practicla way for protecting the forests. The author maintains that this fund is an efficient solution for at leat three reasons. In contrast, the lecturer challenges these reasons one by one and states that, these reasons are flwed. Firstly, as it is said on the passages, the international fund is able to help to save forests by helping to farmers. On the contreary, the lecturer rebusts this point and he mentions that the agriculture specially modern agriculture have harmful impacts on the environment. Take the fertelizer and pstecides az exmples, which their runoffs have harmful effects on the soil even these adverse effect are worse than the logging. Therefore, funiding to farmers is no a good idea. Secondly, author suggests that the international fund is able to help viliage and tribal residents with a stipend. On the other hand, the professor refuses this arguemnt and he points out that, international fund should help to forrest owners and in most of the countries governement are onwing the forests not people. In this respect, the governments may spend the given fund for other goals and they do not distribute the money as stipend among people. Hence, this is not a practical way for international fund to spend money. Thirdly, the author propeses that international fund should help governments and people to matain the biodiversity of the forests. The lecturer, however, objects this point and he mentions that there is no guarentee that people plant the same trees in the forest which have lost their trees. In better words, people might plant comercial trees rather than the native trees. In result, this precedure have no impact for saving the forest biodiverstiy.