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 the 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 a 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.
Both passage and lecture focus upon the debate of salvage logging which refers to eliminating dead trees after a forest fire. The author put forward certain claims which are disregarded by the speaker. The lecturer states a few counterpoints to advocate her opinion.
First, according to the author If the action of removing dead trees would not happen, then there will be a problem for new plants to grow. On the other hand speaker states that cleaning up the forest after a storm is not necessary. Also, natural things remain after the fire, which might be beneficial for future trees to grow.
Second, the author claims that removing dead trees highly useful for insects and beetles so as to decrease the danger of insect invasion. On the contrary, the lecturer professes that dead trees do not habitats only by trees, but also spruce bark beetles also. Also, salvage logging may end up doing more harm things.
Lastly, the passage advocates the economic benefits of salvage trees, and through this, a vast number of people might b employees, specifically local people. Conversely, the orator rebuts the statement saying that salvage logging's economic benefits are very small and do not last very long. This action could be done by helicopters or machines and the job created for salvage logging is very temporary.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 90, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...s highly useful for insects and beetles so as to decrease the danger of insect invasion....
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 255, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
... by trees, but also spruce bark beetles also. Also, salvage logging may end up doing...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, first, if, lastly, may, second, so, then, as to, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 7.0 22.412803532 31% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 30.3222958057 76% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1101.0 1373.03311258 80% => OK
No of words: 220.0 270.72406181 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.00454545455 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85128510684 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4091552307 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.604545454545 0.540411800872 112% => OK
syllable_count: 336.6 419.366225166 80% => 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: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.7339614903 49.2860985944 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.75 110.228320801 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3333333333 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.83333333333 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.184181615337 0.272083759551 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0680841180627 0.0996497079465 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0492642688819 0.0662205650399 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113180900066 0.162205337803 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0444095065238 0.0443174109184 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 63.6247240618 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.