Although the sale of rhinoceros horns is illegal worldwide, rhinoceroses (Rhinos) are commonly poached (hunted illegally) for their horns, which can be sold for tens of thousands of dollars per kilogram. Rhino horns are so valuable that one type of rhino is already extinct because poachers killed too many of them. All rhinos may soon become extinct unless something is done to help save them. Several ideas have been suggested
The first idea is for wildlife experts to “dehorn" Rhinos living in the wild. Dehorning means removing the horns of living rhinos to make them less attractive to poachers Horns can be removed without hurting the animals if medical equipment and drugs to calm the animals are used When this strategy was tried on a small scale in the early 1990s; none of the rhinos dehorned at the time were killed by poachers.
The second possibility is to educate consumers. The majority of rhino horn sold is used in medicines Although rhino horn is believed to have health benefits, this belief has no scientific foundation Rhino horn consists almost entirely of keratin, the same material found in human hair and nails. Keratin has no known health value. Educating consumers about keratin could greatly decrease the demand for rhino horn
The third possibility is to legalize government sales of rhino horn. Some governments have large amounts of horn, taken from poachers they have arrested This horn is often kept in storage. However, if government sales were legal, large quantities of horn that governments already have could be sold at very low prices Poachers kill rhinos because consumers pay high prices for their horns If governments started selling cheap rhino horn, rhino poaching would no longer be profitable and would probably stop, at least for a while. That might help endangered rhino populations to recover.
Both the reading and listening sections are discussing Rhinos, which selling their horns is illegal but hunters are killing them for the high price of the horns. The author believes that all Rhinos will become extinct in near future if nothing done to prohibit poachers, so he suggested several ideas in this context. On the contrary, the professor finds the article's idea inaccurate and declares some arguments in an opposing view.
Initially, the author supposes dehorning Rhinos throughout a medical procedure to make them less attractive to hunters, which does not hurt the animal. In contrast, the professor states that although this action needs time and money to find, prepare and remove the horn, Rhinos use horns in several reasons such as dig for water, guide and protect their juveniles, protect their territory and also break down the branches to find food.
In the second, the writer believes that if they educate consumers and let them know that the entire of horn is just made of Keratin, which is futile, could decrease the demand of buying them. Yet again, the lecturer provides some contents conversely, which is people have many strong traditional beliefs about the health benefits of Rhino horns, and education works best when people do not have any strong idea about that subject. When they confront with a very old and strong idea, scientists cannot change people's mind.
The last point of the argument between the essayist and the orator is making legalize of selling horns. The writer's idea is if governments try to sell the horns that have been accumulated from arrested poachers in low prices, people will buy them legally. Hunters kill Rhinos because of people pay high prices to buy horns, so selling them legally by governments will stop poaching Rhinos. However, the lecturer illustrates that it would be unpredictable because selling horns becomes acceptable to governments, the demand will grow drastically and they create a large market in this era. Hence, the loss economic plus large demand will result in price increasing. Therefore, it attracts hunters to kill more and sell the horns.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 360, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'articles'' or 'article's'?
Suggestion: articles'; article's
...n the contrary, the professor finds the articles idea inaccurate and declares some argum...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 68, Rule ID: THE_NN_AND_THE_NN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'are'?
Suggestion: are
...ent between the essayist and the orator is making legalize of selling horns. The w...
^^
Line 7, column 109, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...s making legalize of selling horns. The writers idea is if governments try to sell the ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, hence, however, if, second, so, therefore, in contrast, such as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1785.0 1373.03311258 130% => OK
No of words: 349.0 270.72406181 129% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11461318052 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42601884617 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 145.348785872 144% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.598853868195 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 534.6 419.366225166 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.8518579324 49.2860985944 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.5 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.9285714286 21.698381199 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.35714285714 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.196572477595 0.272083759551 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.060367474673 0.0996497079465 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607753498024 0.0662205650399 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128264345805 0.162205337803 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0561178465276 0.0443174109184 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.3589403974 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 63.6247240618 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.