issue 083 环保 自认为凑合 限时时没写结尾 请多指教

vincefoxUID: 168199

Issue 083
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.


My writing:

Nowadays, environmental protection has been one of the top issues of our government. But as to some publicly owned wilderness areas which are extremely remote, whether or not our government should take measures to preserve them is a question of controversial. Although in a few cases exploiting is a more worthy choice, I still insist that we should preserve most wilderness areas. And it is important for us to make a balance of preserving and exploiting.

First, the mere intrinsic value of natural wilderness areas is a sufficient reason for protecting. People are always nature loving. We originated in nature, and even now it is almost an animal instinct than we feel most comfortable in natural environment. When seeing TV programs or magazine articles about some Amazon rainforest or Wild West plains, even though we may never go to these certain places, we will still think preserve the natural state is better than destroy it. It is the wilderness' inherent beauty and harmony that arise the deepest feeling in our mind.

Secondly, ecology effects of wilderness often make these areas worth preserving. Our mother earth processes a system of exchanges and interactions between all living creatures that keeps our biosphere alive and thriving, and that is what we call eco-system. All the components of biosphere are mutually affected despite the physical distance. Rainforest are the lung of our world; deforestation on the upper reaches of a river may increase the sand in the water, which in term could affect the drinking water quality of people in the lower reaches, or even cause flood and top soil erosion. In short, although only a few people may ever been to a wilderness area, it might be benefiting us in one way or another for thousands of years, and if we destroy the delicate balance of nature, we may be severely punish by catastrophe.

Thirdly, the wilderness places, though remote, may still process lots of potential tourism value or biological resource for us to preserve them. Some reports tell us the scientists recently discovered some herb medicine and frog poison that can be applied in curing cancer or heart disease*. In current stage, since our knowledge of nature is limited, we cannot rude out the possibility that we may make more useful discoveries in the mysterious wilderness area. If these wilderness areas are destroyed or destructively exploited, the catastrophic result would be just like in Stone Age we destroyed the plain in which the ancient wild wheat and rice grow and led human nowadays can only live upon some meanly harvested grain. And concerning tourism, our potential benefit can be even more feasible.

Having recognized that the wilderness areas share these three aforementioned traits and are of immense value, we still need to understand the importance of certain wilderness area varied from case to case. It is almost a common knowledge that the ecology value and the biological diversity of a desert, although it may contain some unique animal or plant, cannot match those of a rainforest or coral reef.

Still, while judging the cases that important economic or military values are involved, sacrificing some wilderness areas may better serve our short term goal. After all, our society need to process, areas that are wild in the past are needed for our expanding cities and developing industries, for mining and thrill to provide energy and raw material, for agriculture to feed the growing world population. And in all the aforementioned process, damaging the nature is a inevitable cost. Any statement that advocating absolute preserving of wilderness area is oversimplified and naive. On the contrary, we should judge the necessity while decide whether wilderness area should be used.

In sum, we should understand wilderness areas are of unique importance to us and future generation, but some wilderness areas will inevitably be exploited to meet society's demand. The right approach in resolving such dilemma is careful weighing the value of wilderness area and the benefit brought about by exploiting.

vincefoxUID: 168199

自己顶一下吧 n_n

Michael7UID: 57920

占个座，中午我来改！
我也刚刚写好这个题目，阁下也不妨拍即砖！
https://bbs.gter.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=217623

Michael7UID: 57920

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.

Nowadays, environmental protection has been one of the top issues of our government. But as to some publicly owned wilderness areas which are extremely remote, whether or not our government should take measures to preserve them is a question of controversialcontroversial-adj.. Although in a few cases exploiting is a more worthy choice, I still insist that we should preserve most wilderness areas. And it is important for us to make a balance of preserving and exploiting.

First, the mere intrinsic value of natural wilderness areas is a sufficient reason for protecting. People are always nature loving. We originated in 是不是from啊？nature, and even now it is almost an animal instinct than we feel most comfortable in natural environment. When seeing TV programs or magazine articles about some Amazon rainforest or Wild West plains, even though we may never go to these certain places, we will still think topreserve the natural state is better than todestroy it. It is the wilderness' inherent beauty and harmony that arise the deepest feeling in our mind.TS所说为内在价值是一个充足的理由，而题目论述为人类喜爱自然。是那些方面使得人类对自然产生这种情感呢？自然风光，还是什么，是不是论述一下比较好，并且要扣住TS的intrinsic value

Secondly, ecology effects of wilderness often make these areas worth preserving. Our mother earth processes a system of exchanges and interactions between all living creatures that keeps our biosphere alive and thriving, and that is what we call eco-system. All the components of biosphere are mutually affected despite the physical distance. Rainforest are the lung of our world; deforestation on the upper reaches of a river may increase the sand in the water, which in term could affect the drinking water quality of people in the lower reaches, or even cause flood and top soil erosion. In short, although only a few people may ever been to a wilderness area, it might be benefiting us in one way or another for thousands of years, and if we destroy the delicate balance of nature, we may be severely punish by catastrophe.这段论述的很具体，认为很好.只是最后一句的转折关系再斟酌一下，“尽管只有少数人到达荒野，但是它可能千年来对我们有利”。

Thirdly, the wilderness places, though remote, may still process lots of potential tourism value or biological resource for us to preserve them. Some reports tell us the scientists recently discovered some herb medicine and frog poison that can be applied in curing cancer or heart disease*. In current stage, since our knowledge of nature is limited, we cannot rude ruleout the possibility that we may make more useful discoveries in the mysterious wilderness area. If these wilderness areas are destroyed or destructively exploited, the catastrophic result would be just like in Stone Age we destroyed the plain in which the ancient wild wheat and rice grow and led human nowadays can only live upon some meanly harvested grain.led...can... And concerning tourism, our potential benefit can be even more feasible.biological value 论述的很有力，tourism value论述较少。

Having recognized that the wilderness areas share these three aforementioned traits and are of immense value, we still need to understand the importance of certain wilderness area varied from case to case. It is almost a common knowledge that the ecology value and the biological diversity of a desert, although it may contain some unique animal or plant, cannot match those of a rainforest or coral reef.

Still, while judging the cases that important economic or military values are involved, sacrificing some wilderness areas may better serve our short term goal. After all, our society need to process, areas that are wild in the past are needed for our expanding cities and developing industries, for mining and thrill to provide energy and raw material, for agriculture to feed the growing world population. And in all the aforementioned process, damaging the nature is a inevitable cost. Any statement that advocating absolute preserving of wilderness area is oversimplified and naive. On the contrary, we should judge the necessity while decide whether wilderness area should be used.一个小让步，不能绝对强调保留原野，不错。只是，TS的military values段中没有阐述，我这样算不算吹毛求疵了，呵呵

In sum, we should understand wilderness areas are of unique importance to us and future generation, but some wilderness areas will inevitably be exploited to meet society's demand. The right approach in resolving such dilemma is careful weighing the value of wilderness area and the benefit brought about by exploiting.
限时可以写成这样，我个人很pf了.例证也很好，能注意一下主题句和内容的一致就更好了！加油！

vincefoxUID: 168199

谢过Michael
对我很有价值
我也帮你改了