The world’s forests are facing increasing pressure which, if left unchecked, will threaten the health of many industries, economies, nations, and lives. The development of an international fund to help developing countries implement useful conservation techniques in forest protection is the best way to protect the world’s forests and hopefully reverse negative trends that imperil our forests. Using the internationally established forest protection fund to protect forest agriculture is perhaps the most important initiative. Dispersing these funds to governments, land owners, and farmers will allow them to resist intrusions by the logging industry, oil companies, and property developers who are after their land. This is a very specific initiative that will help agricultural areas from being developed into environmentally damaging industries and ensure that agricultural farm use is uninterrupted. A second use of this protection fund could be used to develop the economies of villages and tribal communities located in forest areas. By parceling out funds to provide villagers and tribal residents of forests with a stipend will help these people continue their way of life and resist pressure to convert their forest land to the above mentioned industries. Providing living stipends and other financial aid to forest residents will help people afford education, health services, and nutritional aid so that they are less tempted to resort to destructive or exploitative forest practices to make a living. Much of the global concern with deforestation focuses on the alarming loss of biodiversity. Humans use thousands of species of plants and animals on a daily basis for food, shelter, clothing and medicinal needs. Deforestation threatens species that humans rely on for these essential services. Using the international fund to help governments and people establish protected forest areas is the best way to maintain valuable forest biodiversity and protect species from exploitation, endangerment and extinction.
Both the reading and the lecture agree that forests are under tremendous pressure from industrial development. However, the lecturer disagrees with the author’s suggestion for the following reasons that will be explored in the following essay.
Firstly, the author suggests that the world should develop international funding to help developing countries use conservational technology in forest protection. Thus, it will reverse the negative trends that result in deforestation. The professor refutes this because using modern agricultural technologies will have detrimental effects on the surrounding environment. He goes on and mentions that using fertilizers and pesticides has proven to cause water pollution and run-off wastes. Eventually, it will enhance deforestation more rapidly even faster than industrialization.
Secondly, the writer mentions that funding villagers and tribes will help them with resisting the temptation to depend on other resources. He claims that funding the village dwellers will provide them with education, health services, and nutrition aids. Thus, they will resist converting their forests to industries to make a living. Meanwhile, the professor debates this and states that the funding will go to the forest owners not the residents of the forest. he goes on and emphasizes that the forest owner is the government. Thus, there is no guarantee the fund received by the government will be used appropriately to help the villagers and the tribes.
Lastly, the author believes that international funding will help preserve the biodiversity of the forests. Biodiversity includes various species of animals and plants that are used by humans daily. On the other hand, the professor refutes this and mentions that people will eventually plant trees for commercial purposes. He goes on and illustrates that this will probably harm the biodiversity of the forest.
To sum up, the professor finds the reasons mentioned by the author are flawed and inadequate.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 90, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[5]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to develop' or 'develop'.
Suggestion: to develop; develop
...d develop international funding to help developing countries use conservational technology...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 463, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: He
...owners not the residents of the forest. he goes on and emphasizes that the forest ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, lastly, second, secondly, so, thus, well, while, to sum up, 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: 13.0 5.04856512141 257% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 5.01324503311 279% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1696.0 1373.03311258 124% => OK
No of words: 301.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63455149502 5.08290768461 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03367559287 2.5805825403 118% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551495016611 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 509.4 419.366225166 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 25.2523681813 49.2860985944 51% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 94.2222222222 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7222222222 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.66666666667 7.06452816374 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252064130981 0.272083759551 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.079260614571 0.0996497079465 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0786845509781 0.0662205650399 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118949255419 0.162205337803 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0801529533726 0.0443174109184 181% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.08 12.2367328918 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.57 8.42419426049 114% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 63.6247240618 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.