"为我所用"小组第十三次作业issue83

rienziUID: 2402391

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: 509          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2008-4-8 11:42:35



    With the high speed of modernization in both developed countries and developing countries, more and more wild nature has been destroyed for industrial or other purposes which are beneficial only to humankind rather than wild animals or the planet. Sometimes, this kind of extreme natural exploit can lead to fatal result to us. The statement suggests government to perserve all the wilderness areas publicly in their natrual state no matter how far these areas are from people. I think this suggestion is good for humankind but sometimes it is too idealistic for us to fulfill.
    To begin with, I can discuss the benefits from preserving wilderness areas in their origin state in the hand of government. As has been discussed in my first paragraph, the ruin of those nature areas such as frost, sea and so on has cause many negative effects of our humankind. For instance, the global warming issue, which has been concerned by us deeply then ever before. Two faults of us has led the temperature of our atmosphere become higher and higher around the world: the extremely big amount of the warming gas, especailly carbon dioxide, where are giving out by us; the largely ruin of frost by us. If more frosts can be protected by our government from being destroyed by small groups of people, the less iceberg will melt and these cities near the sea will be free from being under water in the near future. There are many other examples that can be presented to show the benefits from publicly owned wilderness areas. We must keep the beauty of our in order to keep us and other animals living in the planet.
    But, preserving publicly owned wilderness areas in natural state requires much more funds which is even beyond the imagination of normal individuals. For those areas which are much farther from civilian, for example, the tropical rain frost in Brazile, which is the so-called lung of the earth, preservation requires far more money and complete preservation is almost impossible. Sometimes even money can not preserve these areas. Animals are part of our natural environments. Whales around Australia are in danger because the extreme hunting of those sea mammals in Japan. This problem involves the alimentary customs of an oriental country and the ecosystem of an eastern country. It can not be solved by a single government or by money. It requires the cooperation of our international society. As has been discussed above, the statement is too idealistic for us to fulfill completely.
    More efforts should be made to preserve wilderness areas in their natural state. To the example of tropical frost in Brazile, international institutions should take the burden of funding the developing country to preserve those green treasure of our planet. And to those lovely sea mammals around Australia and Japan, the two country should collaborate to deal with the dilemma.
    Given the discussion above, in one hand, the statement is true to describe the importance of the preservation of wilderness areas and in another hand, it is too idealistic.