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 main idea of both the reading and the lecture is about the ways to prevent the poaching of Rhinos for their horns. The reading passage presents three solutions to decrease the rhinos' killing. The professor casts doubt on the claims made in the article. She believes that none of the ideas are practical and effective.
First, the author of the reading passage mentions that dehorning the rhinos can be a useful way that makes them less attractive to poachers. The lecturer opposes this notion, pointing out that the dehorning needs a lot of money and time, also rhinos' horns are necessary for living in the wild. Actually, rhinos use their horns in order to dig for water, and provide food from branches, and also they protect their children from dangers with horns.
Second, the reading passage states that if the horns' consumers are educated and informed that the horns do not have any important health value, they do not kill rhinos for just their horns. The professor rebuts this argument, explaining that consumers' beliefs are very strong cultures and old thoughts therefore, it is unlikely that education is able to change these strict beliefs.
Finally, the author of the text notes that government can reduce the rate of rhinos killing by legalizing the sale of the rhino horn. The lecturer counters this idea by asserting that the legalized sales of horns cause the demand for horns to be increased. Moreover, because of the more demands, the price of the horns will be increased too. As a result, poachers will kill the rhinos more and more and poaching will not stop.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 197, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...lutions to decrease the rhinos killing. The professor casts doubt on the claims mad...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, if, moreover, second, so, therefore, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => 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: 1315.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 271.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.85239852399 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05734859645 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.29566564314 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542435424354 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 396.0 419.366225166 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.8730063625 49.2860985944 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.153846154 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8461538462 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.53846153846 7.06452816374 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.34332888331 0.272083759551 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.119042657439 0.0996497079465 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0822036053256 0.0662205650399 124% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202506275273 0.162205337803 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0679991790848 0.0443174109184 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.85 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.