Question

for the birds!
the endangered species act was passed by congress in 1973 to protect animals and plants that were at risk of becoming extinct. the following editorial appeared in a local newspaper in north carolina in 1937
dear citizens of triston,
as a concerned citizen of triston and member of the north carolina conservation of nature council, i am asking for the community’s help with a serious issue. first, i want to congratulate our town’s mayor and city council for planning to build a new community theater. however, do they realize that building the theater on asbury woodlands will destroy the prime breeding ground for an endangered species?
the bachman’s warbler is a small bird about four inches in length. this green - backed bird has a bright yellow belly and face and is sometimes confused with the similarly colored hooded warbler.
since 1897, the population of the bachman’s warbler has decreased from over 500,000 to fewer than 100 in north carolina. the main reason is the destruction of the areas (like asbury woodlands) that it uses for its natural breeding grounds. bachman’s warblers prefer thickly wooded swamps and
4
select the correct answer.
how does the fourth paragraph help the author to develop his claim?
a. the author offers additional information to the readers by comparing the community theater to the nobel hotels.
b. the author suggests that a better solution would be to build a nobel hotel as did cape pristo, north carolina.
c. the author restates his claim that the building plan would destroy the breeding ground for the bachman’s warbler.
d. the author uses an example to point out how an alternative could satisfy both sides of the argument.
reset next

Explanation:

To solve this, we analyze each option:

• Option A: Comparing community theater to Nobel Hotels isn't about adding info for the claim (protecting the bird's habitat), so A is wrong.
• Option B: The author isn't suggesting building a Nobel Hotel; the focus is on protecting the breeding ground, so B is wrong.
• Option C: The fourth paragraph (not fully shown, but from context) – the author's main claim is the theater would destroy the breeding ground. But the option about "restating" – however, looking at D, the example of an alternative (maybe a different building site like Nobel Hotel example) to satisfy both (theater and protecting habitat) makes sense. Wait, re - evaluating: The author's claim is that building the theater on Asbury Woodlands is bad. Option D says the author uses an example to show an alternative that satisfies both (like building the theater elsewhere, maybe where Nobel Hotels are, so both the theater is built and the breeding ground is saved). Option C: If the fourth paragraph was restating the claim, but the options – let's re - check. The key is the purpose of the fourth paragraph. The author's claim is against building the theater on the woodlands. An alternative (like using a different site, e.g., where Nobel Hotels are) would satisfy both (theater construction and protecting the bird). So D is correct because it shows an alternative that meets both sides (the town's need for a theater and the conservation of the bird's habitat).

Answer:

D. The author uses an example to point out how an alternative could satisfy both sides of the argument.