argue137 My first A~thank you~

jbx733UID: 2658884

137.The following appeared in an editorial in the Mason City newspaper.

"At present, Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity, even though surveys of the region's residents consistently rank water sports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Since there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river because they think that it is not clean enough. But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in our region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to increase, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River."

1)people like water sports, but M may not clean or safe enough
2)the effective and efficiency of the agency
3)publicly owned lands


The conclusion of this argument is that the council needs to improve the public owned lands along the river which the agency announced plan to clean up as residents will use it more for recreational activity. Although the author's reasoning seems to be relatively sound at first glance, we will find, while clearly examining the author's reasoning, that it is unconvincing for several critical flaws.

The major problem of the argument is that the assumption which the council should improve the publicly owned lands along the river as the recreational use of the river is likely to increase after the river is cleaned up is too brief, and too general. Nothing is mentioned about the local circumstances and the status quo of the riverside, it only tells us there are complains about the quality of the water in the river. Is the riverside clean now? What can the council do to achieve this improvement? What infrastructures people need to do water sports like swimming, fishing and boating? How much will the council spend to improve the riverside? How will the council maintenance the infrastructure in the future? Considering some residents like water sports while others don't, how many people agree to increase tax for this plan? Will this improvement biring most residents benefit, for instance, to ensure an increase in public satisfaction? The council need to implement a more explicit and considerate survey before making such a decision.

In addition, the author seems to believe the plan announced by the agency responsible for rivers will be carried out effectively and efficiently at once. However, this might not be the case. The author obviously does not take other aspects of cleaning up the Mason river into account, such as the level of pollution, the difficulty of cleaning increases while it rises higher meanwhile the agency will spend more time, and the work efficiency of the agency which plays an important role but, as we all know, always disappoints us. The agency should investigate deeply to make out a schedule and follow it strictly.

Finally, the arguer has discovered that the pollution of the river is the chief criminal of the issue that Mason City residents seldom use the  river for any lind of recreational activity, however, he fails to consider several other relevant factors that may cause residents' avoiding the river. Perhaps the Mason River is an compulsory waterway,for instance, or the Mason City itself is an important wharf, even though the agency cleans up the river downright, cargoboats and passenger ships whistle and steam along the river everyday. Is it still safe for people swimming or boating in the river? Is it quite enough for residents throwing their barb with earthworm into the river and luring fish? The author indeed have to be thoughtful when make a suggestion to such a governmental office.

As it stands, the argument is not convincing-although the author points out the pollution-and the decision should be reconsidered. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence that residents will go to the river to have recreational activity. To better evaluate the decision, the council also need to discuss it based on the local circumstances.

532 words