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

The governments should maintain remaining of wilderness areas by regulation even if these areas are placed in places which can cause economic growth. Numerous positive points can be considered to support this statement; however, this assertion can be rejected by looking at it from another point of view. In what follows, I am going to discuss this issue from both angles.

To begin with, it is believed that people and governments are responsible to preserve natural resources like wilderness areas because future generations need them too. As you know, wilderness areas are the habitat of considerable kinds of animals; hence, destroying these places cause danger to animals' life and they may become to be extinct. It helps to think of startling discoveries which human can achieve them by studying animals' life style; therefore, if ancestors did not preserve wilderness areas, maybe human cannot achieve many of their achievements today.

On the other hand, it is accepted that governments should ease economic development. As far as economic growth is concerned, there should not be any kind of limitation; consequently, if wilderness areas are placed in areas that can be used for economic development, the administration should move the flora and fauna from that place to another place and use that area for economic growth because it cause vast profit for both people who live at this era and their next generations.

From my point of view, I should say that I lodge myself somewhere between the two positions. In fact, what is missing in both of these viewpoints is that researchers and economics should evaluate the economic growth and environmental impacts of keeping or removing these areas and then help the government to making decision about that.

To sum up, no one can deny the plus points of preserving wildness areas; however I personally agree with letting to remove them if the economic growth of removing them outnumber the environmental effects since it seems to be more advantageous.