Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
Although I generally agree with the statement, I believe that laws passed to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in the natural state might be too strict. It is true that we must preserve wilderness areas. Otherwise, life would not be possible on our planet. However, the claim is too strict: some areas must be preserved, but some can be developed for economic growth, as long as some criteria is met.
First, let us evaluate which criteria must be met to decide which areas must be preserved, and which could be developed. In my view, the first criteria must be the wellbeing of the population surrounding the wilderness area. The development of an area should only be done if the wellbeing of the population surrounding the area could be significantly improved. If the development would end poor life standards, bring benefits such as better healthcare to the native people from that area.
Also, the development of an area should only be done if economic gains are fairly distributed amongst all the population living in the area. It should never be permitted solely for the gain of a selected few. It must be used to reduce inequality, not amplify it. Otherwise, we would solve one problem but create another.
Finally, some economic gains from developing these areas must preserve other areas, where the first criteria mentioned above is not met. Whenever possible, wildlife from the developed areas must be relocated to the ones we selected to preserve.
It is true that wilderness areas must be preserved to the best we can. Preserving our biosphere is what makes our living on our planet possible. By wiping out all wilderness areas, destabilizing several important systems in nature, would lead to catastrophic consequences, such as global warming.
Nevertheless, defenders of the strict view of preserving any wilderness area fail to acknowledge that if these areas are being preserved at the cost of the population's wellbeing, that defeats the purpose of preserving it. People's minimum life standards should come first, as long as some areas are preserved and the main systems in nature are kept stable.
- No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the 66
- Claim In any field business politics education government those in power should step down after five years Reason The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership Write a response in which you discuss the extent to wh 83
- Educational institutions should actively encourage their students to choose fields of study that will prepare them for lucrative careers 70
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state even if these areas could be developed for economic gain Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position 58
- Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archa 33
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 11, column 157, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'populations'' or 'population's'?
Suggestion: populations'; population's
... are being preserved at the cost of the populations wellbeing, that defeats the purpose of ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, so, well, such as, in my view, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.5258426966 133% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 14.8657303371 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 58.6224719101 56% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1785.0 2235.4752809 80% => OK
No of words: 350.0 442.535393258 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32530772707 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80731551632 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 215.323595506 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.494285714286 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 560.7 704.065955056 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.9620338456 60.3974514979 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.9473684211 118.986275619 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4210526316 23.4991977007 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.21951772744 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.339995174222 0.243740707755 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118079349665 0.0831039109588 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0742775822759 0.0758088955206 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.195607929162 0.150359130593 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0540170291761 0.0667264976115 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 100.480337079 80% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.