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.
The reading states that due to the demand and value of rhinoceros horns, the rihnos are poached leading to one type of rhino going extinct. In the passage the author has introduced three ways to stop poachers from hunting rihnos. However, the professor states that each suggestion has significant weaknesses.
First, The passage states that by dehorning rihnos they would be less attractive to poachers effectively stopping them from hunting the species. The professor argues against this notion pointing out that this suggestin is impractical. To do such an operation we need to find and prepare the rihnos and then remove their horns. Other than the hardships that such an endeavor presents the horns are there for the survival of this animal. The rihnos use their horns to dig for water and protect their territory and children. Hence, dehorning them would be disadvantageous for their survival in the wild.
Second, the passage posits that most rihno horns are sold as medicin and by educating customers about them having no medicational values the buyers would be discouraged from buying them. But, the lecturer explains that peoples' belief about the horns being powerful medicin is a very old belief and it is such an strong idea that it would be particularly hard to change their mindset by using scientific evidence.
Third, the article points states that by legalizing the sales of rihno horns and lowering their prices the poachers wont benefit from the sales and would stop hunting the rihnos altogether. However, The professor points out that there are many people that do not buy horns because the sale of horns is illegal. By changing the law buying them would seem acceptable leading to demand to grow. Therefore, poachers would continue hunting for such a large and lucrative market.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 309, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...cin is a very old belief and it is such an strong idea that it would be particular...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, second, so, then, therefore, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1506.0 1373.03311258 110% => OK
No of words: 297.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07070707071 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15134772569 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48919714738 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.525252525253 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 446.4 419.366225166 106% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.0712491691 49.2860985944 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.4 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.4 7.06452816374 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.219518614213 0.272083759551 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0755261737379 0.0996497079465 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0575671693243 0.0662205650399 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132433968757 0.162205337803 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0223314074532 0.0443174109184 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.