In the United States, it had been common practice since the late 1960s not to suppress natural forest fires. The “let it burn” policy assumed that forest fires would burn themselves out quickly, without causing much damage. However, in the summer of 1988, forest fires in Yellowstone, the most famous national park in the country, burned for more than two months and spread over a huge area, encompassing more than 800,000 acres. Because of the large scale of the damage, many people called for replacing the “let it burn” policy with a policy of extinguishing forest fires as soon as they appeared. Three kinds of damage caused by the “let it burn” policy were emphasized by critics of the policy.
First, Yellowstone fires caused tremendous damage to the park’s trees and other vegetation. When the fires finally died out, nearly one third of Yellowstone’s land had been scorched. Trees were charred and blackened from flames and smoke. Smaller plants were entirely incinerated. What had been a national treasure now seemed like a devastated wasteland.
Second, the park wildlife was affected as well. Large animals like deer and elk were seen fleeing the fire. Many smaller species were probably unable to escape. There was also concern that the destruction of habitats and the disruption of food chains would make it impossible for the animals that survived the fire to return.
Third, the fires compromised the value of the park as a tourist attraction, which in turn had negative consequences for the local economy. With several thousand acres of the park engulfed in flames, the tourist season was cut short, and a large number of visitors decided to stay away. Of course, local businesses that depended on park visitors suffered as a
Both the reading and lecture discuss whether "let it burn" policy, forest fire burning without damaging brings consequences or not. The former argues that they brings huge damages as soon as it was implemented and there were three consequences by doing so, but latter challenges each of these points.
First of all, the author of the passage asserts that Yellowstone fires gigantic damages to various trees and flora of parks and even demolished the waste land of country. However, the professor in lecture contends that this hypothesis does not hold true because let it burn policy become creative rather than damaging after yellow stone fire. It helps to colonies new plants and even make more diversified with plants than earlier. Moreover, smaller plants gets open area, and seeds also emerged due to heat.
Secondly, according to the passage, the expert opined that it destroyed the habitats of animals and disrupts in food chains. In contrast, the lecture objects this idea. She supports her argument by presenting the example of rabbits and herds, which gets new favorable habitats as small plants were emerged quickly. Furthermore, the predators demands upon rabits so that it strongly balance food chain.
Finally, the passage claims that fires turn out the local economy, as park was completely destroyed and it diminished in the number of tourist. Nevertheless, like two suggestions before, the professor in her lecture proclaims that this consequences is not feasible because yellow fire only cut off tourism for one year, but after 1 year the number of tourists were dramatically increased.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 171, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'bring'
Suggestion: bring
...ces or not. The former argues that they brings huge damages as soon as it was implemen...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 232, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...professor in her lecture proclaims that this consequences is not feasible because ye...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, in contrast, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => 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: 1375.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 258.0 270.72406181 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32945736434 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58769919585 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.651162790698 0.540411800872 120% => OK
syllable_count: 411.3 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.9055632856 49.2860985944 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.583333333 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3333333333 7.06452816374 146% => 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 : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.150376081956 0.272083759551 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.046561244505 0.0996497079465 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0740320104416 0.0662205650399 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0843331967699 0.162205337803 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0660302140957 0.0443174109184 149% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.63 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.39 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.