Read the passage and answer the questions given below it.
Nobody thought to count the house sparrow while it was everywhere, and that is the first difficulty in explaining where it went. Through the 1990s and 2000s, people in many Indian cities noticed that the small brown bird that once hopped across every veranda was now hard to find. Birdwatchers’ records suggest the loss has been sharpest in the big cities, while villages and small towns have kept more of their flocks.
Why it happened is still argued over, and no single cause has been proven. The likely suspects, though, have something in common. An old house, with its tiled roof, wooden beams and cracks under the eaves, offered a sparrow endless places to nest; a block of glass and concrete offers almost none. The parents live largely on seeds, but their chicks need soft insects in their first days, and a neighbourhood of paved yards and clipped lawns of foreign grass breeds few insects. Grain that once spilled outside the corner shop now comes in sealed packets. Hedges and kitchen gardens have given way to parking. Radiation from mobile towers is often blamed too, but that popular claim remains unproven. The sparrow, in a sense, was a casualty of tidiness.
The return, where it is happening, is modest. Every 20 March is now marked as World Sparrow Day, and Delhi has made the house sparrow its state bird. Residents in several cities fix nest boxes under their balconies, and some pairs do move in. Yet a box is only half an answer. The pair inside needs insects for its young close by, so the more practical volunteers now plant native shrubs beside the boxes and leave one corner of the garden untrimmed.
Which of the following best expresses the central argument of the passage?
Answer & explanation
Correct answer: option 2
The correct answer is Option (2) → Sparrows seem to have been squeezed out by neater cities, and bringing them back needs food as well as places to nest.
The passage asks why sparrows left Indian cities and how they can return, and one idea runs through both parts.
- The writer says no single cause “has been proven”. But the likely causes “have something in common”. Fewer gaps to nest in, fewer insects, sealed grain and lost hedges all come from a neater city.
- The writer sums this up in one line: the sparrow was “a casualty of tidiness”. A casualty is someone or something harmed by an event.
- The last paragraph adds that a nest box is “only half an answer”. The chicks also need insects close by. So bringing sparrows back needs food as well as shelter.
Why the Other Options are Incorrect?
Option 1: Modern blocks of flats, which leave sparrows nowhere to nest, are the main reason the bird has left Indian cities. — Incorrect. Too narrow: Nesting places are only one of several likely causes. The writer also says no single cause has been proven.
Option 3: Since sparrows are still common in villages, the worry about their decline in India has been overstated. — Incorrect. Misread: Villages are mentioned only to show that the loss there is smaller. The writer never says the worry is overstated.
Option 4: Awareness days and official honours, more than any change in homes, have done most to bring sparrows back to Indian cities. — Incorrect. Contradicted: The return is called “modest”. The help the writer stresses is nest boxes, native shrubs and untrimmed corners of gardens.