|
3.2号综合 The listening material, the lecturer made several points about the"let it burn" policy. The professor argued that the fires would nothave disastrous impacts but produce creative influences in the long term.However, the reading passage contended that the "let it burn" policymay cause the large scale of damage such as the forest fires in Yellow Park.The professor casted doubts on that reading passage by providing 3 points arecontrary to the passage. First of all, the population and diversity of the plants and vegetationincreased after the fire in Yellowstone. According to the reading material,some trees died out and smaller plants were incinerated. However, the professorindicated that fires gave more opportunities to new plants, which has beenshielded before. This directly contradict what the passage shows us. Second, the population of animals did not affected by the fires. Theprofessor claimed that the population of animals recovered soon after the firesand other animals obtained more living opportunities, which made the food chainbecame stronger than before. This point differs from the reading, which statesthat the fire may destroy the habitats of animals and kill some small animals. Thirdly, the professor maintained that, on the contrary to the passage,fires would not happen frequently and it doesn't make any negative effects tothe tourism. The reason explained by professor is that the park recovered fromthe fires and tourists came to Yellowstone as usual. This still contradictswhat the reading passage indicates, it illustrates that the fires destroyed thevalue of tourism and the number of tourists may decrease, which deduced theeconomic income. |