In the United States, it had been common practice since the late 1960s not to suppress natural forest fires. The "let it burn" policy assumed that forest fire would burn themselves out quickly, without causing much damage. However, in the summer of 1988, forest fires in Yellowstone, the most famous national park in the country, burned for more than two months and spread over a huge area, encompassing more than 800,000 acres. Because of the large scale of the damage, many people called for replacing the "let it burn" policy with a policy of extinguishing forest fires as soon as they appeared. Three kinds of damage caused by the "let it burn" policy were emphasized by critics of the policy.
First, Yellowstone fires caused tremendous damage to the park's trees and other vegetation. When the fires finally died out, nearly one third of Yellowstone's land had been scorched. Trees were charred and blackened from flames and smoke. Smaller plants were entirely incinerated. What had been a national treasure now seemed like a devastated wasteland.
Second, the park wildlife was affected as well. Large animals like deer and elk were seen fleeing the fire. Many smaller species were probably unable to escape. There was also concern that the destruction of habitats and the disruption of food chains would make it impossible for the animals that survived the fire to return.
Third, the fires compromised the value of the park as a tourist attraction, which in turn had negative consequences for the local economy. With several thousand acres of the park engulfed in flames, the tourist season was cut short, and a large number of visitors decided to stay away. Of course, local businesses that depended on park visitors suffered as a result.
Last try:04/08/2020 17:43
Both the reading passage and lecture discuss whether let it burn policy in case of forest fire is good or not. The former argues that there are three reasons for not supporting this policy, but the later refutes each of these points.
First of all, the author of the passage claims that the Yellowstone forest fire turned the enriched forest into a wreck wasteland by burning the small plants. However, the lecture contends that forest fire was vital to create the diversity of plants. Because of this fire, certain small plants were growing up, and the seed of some trees could not be germinated if they can not come in contact in high heat. Therefore, let it burn policy helped to colonize new plants and trees.
Secondly, the text asserts that forest fire might cause the changes of ecological balance, as it destroys the particular habitat and many small animals could not go out from the fire, eventually the whole food chain cycle was affected. In contrast, the listening counters that forest fire made the stronger food chain cycle. As many small plants were growing up which was attracted by rabbits, heirs etc. and it allowed to increase the number of these animals predators. Hence, an ideal habitat was created for all animals.
In third, the reading passage states that it caused a devastating result on local tourism because people made the tourist time shorter, and local business people who relied on this suffered a lot. On the other hand, the lecturer mentions that it was very unusual that happened in 1988. Low rainfall, dry climate all caused a massive fire in Yellowstone. In the next year, after the incidents all were getting normal and people could visit that place, and local businesses were flourished.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 83, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ss whether let it burn policy in case of forest fire is good or not. The former a...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, in contrast, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1445.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 295.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89830508475 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14434120667 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.27695700006 2.5805825403 88% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.583050847458 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 441.0 419.366225166 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.0122425393 49.2860985944 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.3333333333 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6666666667 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.73333333333 7.06452816374 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.236979176174 0.272083759551 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0788574506892 0.0996497079465 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0800916631135 0.0662205650399 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14513282509 0.162205337803 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0622447402345 0.0443174109184 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.3589403974 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.