Issue83 【天道酬勤作文互改小组】第十四次作业

alarenmingUID: 2329302

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: 435          TIME: 00:42:54          DATE: 2007-7-15 14:34:13

I partly agree with the statement about government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in the natural state. Not always all the states are worthy to preserve, and no all the nations have enough ability to preserve such state which are remote and accessible to only a few people.

In the first place, whether there is any value to hold a remote state or not is a factor by which decision is calculated. If this place has its special ecological system, or has very extinguished species, then for the variety of the creatures, it deserves the government's attention. the government should protect this state through which make sure to give the rare species a whole habits. In doing so, on one hand, it not only helps the government publicize the concept of special protection, but also represents a government's mature degree.

Certainly there is another situation is that the state is just a very common place which has no special animals, special plants, special valuable things.
When it is in such circumstances, I see it is not very necessary for the government to do some protection for the state. My reason for this is for both no valuable things and few people's visiting, we can not expect some behaviors' happening which would bring immensely negative results.

If a the state is just like what I mention above----nothing is value there, government also are able to consider how to make use of it. Consider, for example, a factory. Usually, the process will discharge some polluted gas or some polluted water. This kind of factory, government could think about moving it to the remote state which for accessible to few people can develop without being danger to people's health. Or, the disposal can bury the garbage in this place.

however, whether the remote place is value or not, another factor should go into equation by which the protection decision should be made. What I refer is the government's financial situation. different government's situation differ. some government like America is very rich, some like China is in the middle, some other like Iraq is poor. For American federal government, it is not a problem in the financial aspect to preserve publicly wilderness areas. however, country like Iraq, after a war and the economic depression, is in a water and fire, even the government almost lost the ability to guard his country, not to mention the remote wilderness areas.

In sum, to preserve a remote area or not to, is a complex one which ask several consideration. My opinion is we should find a balance between protection and use.