Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
The issue suggests to keep wilderness in that natural habitat and not to use that area for economic development. As animals are constantly loosing their natural habitat it is very important to give them the environment thay can survive in. However, smaller countries which are actually economically poor may find it unacceptable to refrain development in such areas, I believe that are solutions this problem and animals should not loose their natural habitat.
In the past couple of centuries, industrial development has seen great increase. Human population has also surpassed seven billion mark. To provide shelter to human and get more raw materials for industries more and more forests are being utilized. The percentage of forests on land has drastically reduced. This has resulted in wilderness loosing their natural habitat. Many species have become extinct. The spicies who eat them have lost their source of food. This has created imbalance in the entire food chain. This imbalance may also effect humans. Utilizing more such land for economic gain will exacerbate this situation.
As far as economic gain is concerned, most of the countries have unutilized land where developing industry won't effect much to the wild. But these are rural where establishing industry is expensive due high transportation cost or taxes. Government should provide infrastructure and financial incentives to industries to establish there. Also places where wilderness lives can also be developed in such a way that does not harm animals. For example, they can be developed as national parks for tourist. This saves animal's natural habitat as well as gives economic gain and is sustainable development in true sense. For example, south africa earns a good amount from kruger national park and attracts tourists from all over the world.
On the other hand, there are certain countries which are economically poor and have less land for industry. They may clearly find the idea of not utilizing land for economic inappropriate. But they are already rich with the wild life, and can utilizing a certain amount of land for economic gain. This will not have much adverse effect on wilderness. But more than a certain threshold will actually put the wilderness at risk and such development may provide immidiate economic gain will not be sustainable.
Concluding, In most of the countries it should not be allowed to harm wilderness for the sake of economical gain except some cases. Alternate places or options should be taken to provide wilderness their natural habitat.
- Claim: Any piece of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted, since it may well be proven false in the future.Reason: Much of the information that people assume is factual actually turns out to be inaccurate.50
- Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.50
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.50
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.50
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future.50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 114, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...use that area for economic development. As animals are constantly loosing their na...
Line 1, column 367, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
...le to refrain development in such areas, I believe that are solutions this proble...
Line 1, column 434, Rule ID: LOOSE_LOSE
Message: Did you mean 'lose' (= miss, waste, suffer the loss etc.)?
...ons this problem and animals should not loose their natural habitat. In the past co...
Line 2, column 540, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT
Message: Did you mean 'affect'?
...ire food chain. This imbalance may also effect humans. Utilizing more such land for ec...
Line 3, column 338, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
...tives to industries to establish there. Also places where wilderness lives can also ...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, may, so, well, for example, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 58.6224719101 65% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2154.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 410.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25365853659 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75386916173 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 215.323595506 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 684.9 704.065955056 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.2370786517 133% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 23.0359550562 65% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.0290018319 60.3974514979 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.7777777778 118.986275619 67% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.1851851852 23.4991977007 65% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.37037037037 5.21951772744 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 10.2758426966 165% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More 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: 0.295400751759 0.243740707755 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0793912930472 0.0831039109588 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0673005259943 0.0758088955206 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.184451890905 0.150359130593 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0543081746892 0.0667264976115 81% => OK
automated_readability_index: 10.9 14.1392134831 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 48.8420337079 98% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.58 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 100.480337079 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.2143820225 71% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.