issue83 天下无G 荒郊野外题 挤不出话来

lindorUID: 2290025

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."
WORDS: 424          TIME: 0:45:00          DATE: 2007-2-24

The preservation of wilderness areas is growing concerned by many governments and populaces. Faced with the confliction between the demand of nature reservation and industrial development, a controversy arises: whether wilderness areas should be preserved in their natural state, no matter how remote and inaccessible they are? I concede that preserving natural resources is essential for human beings; however, it is unnecessary to keep wilderness areas in the undeveloped state.

There is no denying that preserving wilderness areas in their natural state can prevent them from harmful destroy caused by human's activities, which have brought about numerous disasters to wild areas, such as acid rain, desertification, water pollution and so forth. Ironically, no matter how sincerely government authorities advocate protecting the environment upon where people make a living for descendents, the industrial developments more often than not take precedence over the environmental preservation. Thereby, the most effective measure to keep natural resources seems to be let them alone.

However, it is unnecessary to hold such extreme and negative view on the issue of natural preservation.  With the unstoppable increasing of the population of the whole world, the demand for more lands correspondingly lifts. Concerning that If people never use the wilderness areas, it is entirely possible that the situation of resident regions crowded with more and more people would go worse fast, and in turn, quickly poses harmful effects on the whole globe. Therefore, the wilderness areas could be used to switch the heavy burden of former resident regions and thus to slow the deteriorating process of the world.

Furthermore, if proper measures are taken in those wilderness areas when exploitation undergoes there, these areas would become comfortable living places meanwhile keeping the balance of environment and industry. Retracing to the very beginning of human history, the whole Earth was almost a huge wilderness area. And through endeavors by generations and generations, many places have became a modernized countries or cities, where natural resources have got well preserved, for example, Switzerland. This empirical instance is persuasive to encourage government that legitimate and appropriate exploitation of wilderness areas not only can enhance the living levels of residents but also make the environment more beautiful and comfortable.

In general, the preservation of wild areas is of great importance for human's society in the long run. However, this is not to say that the best way to preserve these areas is to keep them in their natural state. Government should moderate exploit these areas with great cautious, and from which our society will benefit.

askmeUID: 2264776

The preservation of wilderness areas is growing concerned by many governments and populaces. Faced with the confliction between the demand of nature reservation and industrial development, a controversy arises: whether wilderness areas should be preserved in their natural state, no matter how remote and inaccessible they are? I concede that preserving natural resources is essential for human beings; however, it is unnecessary to keep wilderness areas in the undeveloped state.
开头差不多，跳过。。。

There is no denying that preserving wilderness areas in their natural state can prevent them from harmful destroy caused by human's activities, which have brought about numerous disasters to wild areas 好像bring about ... to ... 不合语法，to后面只能接动词, such as acid rain, desertification, water pollution and so forth 这个平行结构是修饰disasters的吧？放在那后面去. Ironically, no matter how sincerely government authorities advocate protecting the environment upon where people make a living for descendents, the industrial developments more often than not take precedence over the environmental preservation. Thereby, the most effective measure to keep natural resources seems to be let them alone. 你这一段其实没有中心句，至少不在第一句。我暂且将你最后一句视为中心句。而且整段的逻辑推不出最后这个结论。
因为环境很重要，而工业常常优先于环保，所以我们要丝毫不动那些地方。想想你的隐含前提是什么？

However, it is unnecessary to hold such extreme and negative view on the issue of natural preservation.你的意思大概是前面是说表面上要保持它们，这里说实际上还是可以利用的。
我建议在前一段多加一些限制，比如在没有意识到人与自然能够和谐发展时，我们要保护环境只能不动他们；但是完全不利用他们也是不行的。。。这个作为中心句大概能更好统领这段。  With the unstoppable increasing of the population of the whole world, the demand for more lands correspondingly lifts. Concerning that If people never use the wilderness areas, it is entirely possible that the situation of resident regions crowded with more and more people would go worse fast, and in turn, quickly poses harmful effects on the whole globe. Therefore, the wilderness areas could be used to switch the heavy burden of former resident regions and thus to slow the deteriorating process of the world.

Furthermore, if proper measures are taken in those wilderness areas when exploitation undergoes there, these areas would become comfortable living places meanwhile keeping the balance of environment and industry. Retracing to the very beginning of human history, the whole Earth was almost a huge wilderness area. And through endeavors by generations and generations, many places have became a modernized countries or cities, where natural resources have got well preserved, for example, Switzerland. This empirical instance is persuasive to encourage government that legitimate and appropriate这个appropriate可以借机分析一下 exploitation of wilderness areas not only can enhance the living levels of residents but also make the environment more beautiful and comfortable.

In general, the preservation of wild areas is of great importance for human's society in the long run. However, this is not to say that the best way to preserve these areas is to keep them in their natural state. Government should moderate exploit these areas with great cautious, and from which our society will benefit.

逻辑好像没问题， 貌似要不动-->实际上还是不得不动-->采用合适的办法动。
我觉得问题还是没有把government体现出来，强调government的特点。比如个人保护环境没人听，政府有强制力。。。

lindorUID: 2290025

嗯.. 对..我要把问题再分细一点来阐述才行. 这样字数也多了.