诚心求修改帮忙~~~~ 请帮忙修改一下argument

corrine2011UID: 2822773

现在处于训练中期，再有十天就要参加考试了，写argument已经差不多成固定式式了，所以发上一片今天刚写的请求大家指教，主要是修改全文逻辑，诚心谢谢帮忙。
看北美范文总结出了自己的模板，不知道是不是用的太僵硬，还是形式太固定会用雷同，这些问题都请大虾指教！！！ 不甚感激……

TOPIC: ARGUMENT137 - The following appeared in an editorial in the Mason City newspaper.


The argument is logically flawed in several respects depending on a series of assumptions. In this article, the author recommends that the Mason City council need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicy owned lands along the Mason River. To strenghten the assertion, the author adduces that the agency responsible for rivers in their region has announced plans to clean up Mason River and recreational use of the river is likely to increase. Close scrutiny of the argument reveals that it lends little credible support to the conclusion the author deduced.

To begin with, the author assumes that Mason City residents seldom use the neraby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity due to that the water is not clean enough. However, there is no evidence to support the assumption. It is entirelly possible that there are one or more other alternatives which are responsible for that residents seldom use the river. For instance, it is summer and citizens are afraid to be exposed under big sun so as not to take any recreational activities and choose to stay home. There is also no evidence to show what points the residents hold. Since the author fails to account for these and other possible explanations for the less use of the river, the author is unable to make any corollary on the basis of conjecture.

In the second place, even assuming that it is because of the low quality of the river that the residents seldom use the river, the author relies on another assumption that recreational use of the river is likely to increase. It is too presumptuous to judge that the use will increase just according to the fact that the agency responsible for rivers in their region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. What are the plans? When will the plans be put into effect? When will the water be clean? Even the plans will take effect soon and the water is clean, it is possible that citizens are still unwilling to swim or fish in the river due to some reasons such as bad weather. Without taking the attitueds of the residents into consideration, the conclusion that residents’ recreational use of Mason River would be undermined.

In the third place, the author concludes that council needs to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River. Why need to do this? Is there any relation between the water and lands? And does the lands are in poor conditions? If the lands are just repaired recently, it definitely a waste of mony and maybe arises citizens' resistence to take this action.

To sum up, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the argument , the author should supply more clear and sound evidence to support that it is the poor quality of the water that cause the citizens not to use the river and after improving the quality, citizen would like to use the river, and a necessary suvery of the condition of the lands along the river.