Issue83 [Victors小组]第九次作业

乳虎UID: 2251211

83"Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness荒野,荒地areas in their natural state, even though these areas are often extremely remote偏僻的,遥远的,远程的and thus accessible可得到的,易接近的,可进入的to only a few people."
提纲：
1很多情况下，原封不动地保护确实是保护生态平衡地必要方法。
2但有时候适当的开发利用会促进环保。
3某些情况下，当代人的经济利益应当得到优先考虑。In this statement， the arguer claims that government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state， even though these extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people. In my view, this issue depends on specific circumstances.In the first place, in some cases, it is necessary to preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their nature state for government to maintain the eubiosis. As everyone knows the ecological equilibrium is vital not only for modernday people but also for our offspring. However, human action has done great harm to it which makes us retaliated by nature. For example, too much greenhouse gas has resulted in greenhouse effect, which makes the temperature of the earth higher and higher and makes the climate abnormal in many regions. If we do not play enough attention to the problem, our environment will be destroyed completely. Admittedly, there are many ways to preserve environment, but preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state seems the most efficient way in some cases. For instance, during Korean War, the area along 38th parallel was destroyed completely. After the war, because the area became the bonder of DPRK and ROK, nobody enter it, as a result, the area revived as a green heaven. In that sense, it seems beneficial to preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state.
Unquestionably, the protection to environment is necessary, but in some cases, to preserve the wilderness in their natural state is neither the best way nor necessary way to protect the environment. It is impossible to prohibit illegal hunting, deforestation etc rely only on the effort of government, instead that need the unite effort of public. Unquestionably, it turns out to be a efficient to evoke the masses and attract them to immerse their effort in this project. Some wilderness is suitable to serve as a natural museum which can increase the masses' knowledge to natural balance and improve their consciousness of environment protection. If the masses' consciousness of environment protection advances, they will devote to fight against those illegal action which destroy the environment. Should we build that place to be a museum or preserve it in its natural state?
However, it is necessary to give priority to satisfy the need of modernday people in many cases. Some areas are useless to preserve the ecological equilibrium but has rich natural resource. For example, Sahara Desert is doomed to fail to become oasis, but there is abundant oil there. So government should permit companies to explore the oil rather than keep the area in its natural state. Furthermore, rational use can not affect the environment even promote the continuable development of the natural resource. For instance, rational graze can accelerate the growth of the grass in grassland. For that matter, government should promote the rational use of resource rather than preserve the wilderness areas in their natural state.
To sum up, government should strike a sound balance between the satisfaction of the need of the people and protection of  ecological equilibrium. For the regions that is significative to ecological equilibrium, government should preserve it in its natural state, while for those areas where the resource is more important to human beings, government should adopt policies to encourage the rational use of the natural recourse. Even in order to protect the environment, specific areas should be made a different use .


[ 本帖最后由 乳虎 于 2007-6-16 18:07 编辑 ]

15348664UID: 2269142

点评

1、greenhouse gas 的例子多余，文章的point不再那里。
2、38度线的例子很切题，good。
3、第二个分论包含了2曾意思，而实际论据证明了保护不是最优的，并没有证明不是必需的。可修改论点或者扩充论据。
4、最后一个论点有点让人摸不到头脑，怎么总感觉和前面的论点是矛盾的啊。到底要不要可持续发展？～