[i习作temp] issue83 这种四级水平的文章还有必要去考试么 [复制链接]

PhoebusYy
UID：199189

新手上路

Rank: 1

声望: 0
寄托币: 56
注册时间: 2005-3-6
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-9-8 21:53:57 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

Should wilderness areas of a country be preserve by its government? Even there are rarely people there? In the speaker's claim, the answer is yes. In my opinion, I agree with the speaker fundamentally in most cases. Publicly owned wilderness areas of a country are not only a part of the country, but also a important part of the biosphere. If they are not preserve well, several problems the country will meet, both in the level of society and environment.

First, regardless a area is wild or not, it is a part of a country. Government must be responsible for it unless it does not exit on the countries' map. In most cases, these wilderness areas are useless, but it is linked to the dignity of a country. Most wars were started because of the territorial problems, nowadays there are also still many conflicts which are caused by territory, these conflicts perhaps are the biggest impediment between countries which want to cooperate in many realms. For example, Russia has taken the four northern islands from Japan for many years, Japanese want to get them back for years. Many cooperations in the areas of economics, nature science, education, arts cannot be worked very well, even cannot be carried out. Are the four islands very rich in resources? Or have some other advantages which Japanese do not have in other places of their country? Perhaps it is the case. But the most important cause is that the islands had been a part of Japan for thousands years until they are took by Russian in war. In every Japanese’s mind, get them back is the duty of government.

Even if there is almost no people live in the wilderness areas, there is still possibility that they are very valuable to human beings. There might be very rich resources, just like petroleum, gas, ore, animals and so on. For instance, the most of biggest oil fields are in the desert of middle east, where would be judged as a wilderness area in most country. But with the petroleum, the Arabian became the richest in the world. If a country abandons a area as its wild with out stick researches about its resources, that might a large loss of the country.

Few people on the wild land might also make a disaster to the environment if the government do not pay attention to there. Pollution, undue hunting are never linked to the number of people, even several people can destroy the ecological balance. For example, in the wild of northern of Tibet in China, there were many Tibetan antelopes which cannot be seen in any other places of the world. In the 1980's to 1990's, these beautiful animals are massacred for their hide, a choice material to make coats. The number of the hunters is nit very large, but twenty hunters could kill thousands of antelopes, and the total number of the antelopes is just a little mare than ten thousand. Without the most important animals, the wilderness might be not only unsuitable to human beings, but also to all kind of lives, northern Tibet might became a forbidden for life.

In sum, publicly owned wilderness areas should be preserved because the alike richness in there. Even the areas are really not useful in any ways, government cannot abandon them for the complete of the territory of the country.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-9-8 at 23:52 ]