Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
With the growing concerns for environmental sustenance, a lot of independent as well as government organizations are putting their steps forward to move forward towards the goal of development of our society in a more environmental-friendly ways. The prompt suggests that the preservation of the wildlife should be mandated by the governments of all the nations even if it means not tapping the full potential of economic growth in those areas. It is a policy that I will wholeheartedly stand with if it is implemented, and I give two sets of reasons for my support: Biological and Philosophical.
The preservation of the wilderness of our planet is extremely important for our own sustenance as well, and we should not put our own lives at risk for the sake of development. After all, what is the point of development, if our own existence hangs by a thread? Numerous scientific studies have established that each and every species, ranging from those as small as the algae on the water bodies to those as large as whales in the oceans play a crucial role in maintaining the balance of our ecosystem. Even if one of the species is to go extinct, it will cause an imbalance in all of the ecosystem which will cause trouble for all other life forms as well. This is demonstrated with a very lucid example. Say, a particular species of grass perishes in a forest. This will mean that a species of deer that feeds on the grass will have difficulty finding food, and its existence will be threatened. If the population of that deer falls, this will spell trouble for the carnivores of the jungle such as Lions and Tigers. There are other animals such as Vultures that feed on the dead bodies of several animals. The reduced populations of other animals will make the survival of such scavengers difficult as well. Our ecosystem exists in such a beautiful yet ephemeral balance, that any external interference might cause devastation at humongous scale. Recently, we saw how the forest fires in the Amazon Rain-forests affected the plethora of life in the region. Forests are responsible for the production of a majority of Oxygen and as we know, Oxygen is vital for the existence of all the species. Conflagration of forests at such a large scale caused a temporary imbalance in Oxygen levels in the region which made it difficult for the locals to breath and they had to flea the area in a hurry. This shows that the preservation of our wildlife and jungles should be our primary concern, even if for our own sake.
The other reason that I have to present is more on a philosophical side. A lot of philosophers and scholars have also supported the idea that all of the species and animal lifeforms, despite the difference in their anatomy, have an equal right to live their lives and it is an idea that I vehemently support. Passing the laws that prohibit poaching and destruction of wildlife and an effective implementation of such laws will definitely reduce the negative effects of human exploitation on nature. Ever since the dawn of industrial age, an unprecedented amount of species have either gone extinct or are at the verge of extinction, the latest casualty being the three-horned rhino. Numerous other species such as the dodo or the Asian cheetah have fallen prey to human activities. Enforcing laws against such infringements will give an equal opportunity for all the species to thrive.
Now, to oppose my argument, one could argue that it is not only humans that are responsible for killing other species, even tigers eat the deer, and the big fish eat the small fish. It is all a part of nature. No other species thinks of environmental concerns before going on hunt. However, to tackle that, I would say that humans are the only species that don't hunt animals only for their survival. All the other species need to hunt in order to survive, whereas we, humans do it for our leisure or our greed for living extravagant lives in the face of development, which is what makes it unnatural. I'm not saying that we should stop moving towards development; striving towards knowledge and testing our limits is an essential part of man's nature. I'm just arguing that we should do it in a way that does not harm other species and as a result doesn't threaten our own existence and my above arguments prove the point that our existence depends on the existence of other species as well, which is why they should be protected.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 580, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... extinct, it will cause an imbalance in all of the ecosystem which will cause trouble for ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 143, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...olars have also supported the idea that all of the species and animal lifeforms, despite t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 358, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...y that humans are the only species that dont hunt animals only for their survival. A...
^^^^
Line 13, column 602, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: I'm
...ment, which is what makes it unnatural. Im not saying that we should stop moving t...
^^
Line 13, column 751, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: I'm
...ts is an essential part of mans nature. Im just arguing that we should do it in a ...
^^
Line 13, column 846, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... not harm other species and as a result doesnt threaten our own existence and my above...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, well, whereas, after all, such as, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.5258426966 128% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 26.0 11.3162921348 230% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 76.0 33.0505617978 230% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 92.0 58.6224719101 157% => OK
Nominalization: 32.0 12.9106741573 248% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3672.0 2235.4752809 164% => OK
No of words: 770.0 442.535393258 174% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.76883116883 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.26771998601 4.55969084622 116% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84675917148 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 347.0 215.323595506 161% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.450649350649 0.4932671777 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1164.6 704.065955056 165% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 31.0 20.2370786517 153% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.5127542759 60.3974514979 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.451612903 118.986275619 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8387096774 23.4991977007 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.61290322581 5.21951772744 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 5.13820224719 253% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.16610569424 0.243740707755 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0429936193223 0.0831039109588 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0405053023722 0.0758088955206 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108938551306 0.150359130593 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0331957225691 0.0667264976115 50% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.8420337079 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.68 12.1639044944 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 173.0 100.480337079 172% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 21.0 11.8971910112 177% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.