It is indisputable that wild areas are indispensable part of our environment, especially in terms of the diversity of biology. Meanwhile the profound natural resources located in wild areas has drawn attention of vast industrial companies to turn resources into energy and serve for more population. Thus a growing debate of whether a country should step into setting up laws of protecting wilderness areas has become more and more crucial. As far as I am concerned, with a nation’s interfere in preventing improper activities in wild areas could guarantee its wild environment to become over-derived at least possible speed. I hold this opinion due to several considerations below.
To start with, by establishing particular laws to protect wild life and environment would set up boundaries for the behaviors of industrial enterprises. They will then watch out what is something allowed, and what is something that is improper and harmful to the environment. Those companies, which mainly focus on gaining economical profit, usually neglect the impact ecologically. Thus the laws could impose a compulsory force or responsibility for them to follow. Without standardizing the rules for developing the wild areas, the environment there could only get worsened, since there is no limit on deriving the resources out of this area. Enterprises would never put a rest on taking their opportunities to gain benefit, eventually the resource in this area will become scarce and the balance of animals and plants will be disrupted.
Furthermore, to pass laws to protect wild lives is not necessarily contradictory to developing economy. The purpose is to prevent the environment from over-developed, while leaving space for proper activities. If the environment is damaged, the impact might be irreversible. No matter how much endeavor is made, probably the country is never going to recover its original look. And by that time, the energy source of the country’s economy is then drained empty. Hence, passing laws to preserve the wilderness could actually remain certain space for the economy growth in the long run.
Last but not the least, passing laws to limit human being’s activities in wilderness does put constraint on our development. On the other hand, it stimulates economy growth in areas like tourism. Take Amazon rainforest for example, the environment there were terrible decades ago, because government and industrial companies aimed at getting more wealth from this abundant source. Trees were cut down, river was seriously polluted, animals were threatened… After putting up laws to limit the endless deriving, the environment started to recover and more tourists were attracted here. The laws in some aspects live in harmony with the economy growth and contributes to it as well.
To conclude, putting up laws to protect wilderness will not only limit the economy development, but serves as a beneficial role to advocate the future development of a nation. That is why I do recommend government to make appropriate rules to standardize people’s activities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 128, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Meanwhile,
...y in terms of the diversity of biology. Meanwhile the profound natural resources located ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 301, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...o energy and serve for more population. Thus a growing debate of whether a country s...
^^^^
Line 2, column 383, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...sually neglect the impact ecologically. Thus the laws could impose a compulsory forc...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, furthermore, hence, if, look, so, then, thus, well, while, at least, for example, to start with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2611.0 2235.4752809 117% => OK
No of words: 485.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38350515464 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69283662038 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09643358493 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 265.0 215.323595506 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546391752577 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 833.4 704.065955056 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.0967097223 60.3974514979 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.791666667 118.986275619 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2083333333 23.4991977007 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.375 5.21951772744 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.227449655194 0.243740707755 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0616416468175 0.0831039109588 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0498957838369 0.0758088955206 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122716321397 0.150359130593 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0434783255549 0.0667264976115 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.1392134831 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.96 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 100.480337079 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.