Some ornithologists believe that many species of songbirds are threatened by deforestation.
Ornithologists' Conclusion
Deforestation, (despite some recent reforestation), is continuing to worsen matters for many species of songbirds.
Ornithologists' Evidence (since)
It's not reduction of forest size that endangers songbirds (so adding back some forest doesn't necessarily help). It's the fragmentation of the forest that imperils songbirds, because that introduces open spaces and corridors in forests, which reduces the distance from songbird nests to unforested areas, which reduces the songbirds' protection from predators.
Evaluate
Whenever we read Main Conclusion or Role paragraphs, we look out for Conclusions appearing earlier than the supporting ideas. On those two question types, Conclusions frequently come after pivot words such as "but, yet, however".
The evidence has at least one intermediate conclusion, because we see a "thus" in the final claim.
We're being asked about the claim that there has recently been reforestation.
We want to classify that as either Main Conclusion, Support, Opposing, or Neutral.
It's prefaced by the word despite, which automatically seems to cast it in the role of Opposing.
Whenever authors use terms like while / despite / although / granted, they are conceding a potential objection ... they are making acknowledging something their opponents would say.
Goal
Let's look for something like .