Every year, forest fires and severe storms cause a great deal of damage to forests in the northwestern United States. One way of dealing with aftermath of these disasters is called salvage logging, which is the practice of removing dead trees from affected areas and using the wood for lumber, plywood, and other wood products. There are several reasons why salvage logging is beneficial both to a damaged forest and to the economy.
First, after a devastating fire, forests are choked with dead trees. If the trees are not removed, they will take years to decompose; in the meantime, no new trees can grow in the cramped spaces. Salvage logging, however, removes the remains of dead trees and makes room for fresh growth immediately, which is likely to help forest areas recover from the disaster.
Also, dead trees do more than just take up space. Decaying wood is highly suitable habitat for insects such as the spruce bark beetle, which in large numbers can damage live, healthy spruce trees. So by removing rotting wood, salvage logging helps minimize the dangers of insect infestation, thus contributing to the health of the forest.
Third and last, salvage logging has economic benefits. Many industries depend upon the forests for their production, and because of this a fire can have a very harmful effect on the economy. Often, however, the trees that have been damaged by natural disasters still can provide much wood that is usable by industries. Furthermore, salvage logging requires more workers than traditional logging operations do, and so it helps create additional jobs for local residents.
The reading and the lecture are both about salvage logging, which is a doorway to unleash a problem damaging nature after forest fire or storm. The author of reading feels advantages of this method. The lecturer challanges the calims made by the author. She is of the opinion that these theories are falce.
To begin with, the author argues that after removing of dead trees, the environment would be more convenient to treegrowth. Otherwise, it takes years to renewing of soil, if salvage logging is not used to cleaning that area. This specific arguement is challanged by the lecturer. He claims that these fired trees provide more minerals and nutritients to soil. Therefore, it facilitates growing of trees rather than prevent.
Secondly, the author suggests that after these trees get destroyed, insects will spread all this region and damage to forest, which would be dangerous to health of forest. The salvage logging would be benefical to solve this problem as well. The lecturer, however, robuts it byy mentioning, remained wood products are harmful for insects than their impact on trees. That is why, salvage logging would cause to attract more insects because of losing of protection effect of this material.
Finally, the writer posits that salvage logging has economical advantages by providing job opportunities to local residents. In contrast, the lecturer position is that cleaing up of forest is required more expensive vehicles such as helicopter and ect. Beside that, for carefully depurification of forest are needed experienced people rather than normal local population.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 200, 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.
...eading feels advantages of this method. The lecturer challanges the calims made by ...
^^^
Line 3, column 407, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'attracting'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'cause' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: attracting
...hat is why, salvage logging would cause to attract more insects because of losing of prote...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 316, Rule ID: NEEDS_FIXED[1]
Message: "needed experienced" is only accepted in certain dialects. For something more widely acceptable, try 'experiencing' or 'to be experienced'.
Suggestion: experiencing; to be experienced
...lly depurification of forest are needed experienced people rather than normal local populat...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, in contrast, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1343.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 254.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2874015748 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65416532816 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602362204724 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 412.2 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.573502618 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.9375 110.228320801 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.875 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.3125 7.06452816374 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.207375952152 0.272083759551 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0596057042799 0.0996497079465 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0513821589132 0.0662205650399 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120187488049 0.162205337803 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0220405283249 0.0443174109184 50% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.42 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 63.6247240618 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.