TOPIC: ISSUE83 - "Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people."
Since the buildment of country, problems of domain has been continuly feuding. Wilderness areas certainly are a part of these dissensions. The statement asserts that a nation should preserve its wilderness areas. I generally agree with this view.
Like a family, however your child is ugly or foolish, responsibility to raise him up can’t be shirked. A nation also should protect its domain and ensure the stability no matter the land is near or remote. Otherwise, it will be unfair which maybe cause rebellion. That can’t do any good to a society. What’s more, if all nations give freedom to these remote places, they can union together formed larger power which will damage to not only one nation but also the whole world.
Just because of its remote, maybe some available things have not been found. It can have more resources such as minerals to search. Take Australia for example, it has a large continent, most lands are wildermesses. However, it is famous for his abundant minerals and energe resources. And the original biologies are more easy to exist and offer materials to research. Such as the tropic rainforest in the Africa.
Moreover, nowadays many citizens go suburb for the fresh air and quite enviorment. The wilderness areas are accessible to only a few people and so have not so much pollution. To keep this only existed beautiful and clean place, government should protect it even more.
Besides the precious deposits, the unique national culture should be preserved too. With cooperation between countries becoming more frequent, the strick to a nation’s culture also become acute especially these remote places because of its fewer people.
In sum, preserving wilderness not only decrease times of trouble, but also offer many available resources.
| 欢迎光临 寄托家园留学论坛 (https://bbs.gter.net/) | Powered by Discuz! X2 |