argument131 FLY AW小组第36次作业

夜一UID: 2130338

Argument131  第7篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：30分0秒     350 words
从2006年6月10日13时54分到2006年6月10日14时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in an environmental newsletter published in Tria Island.
'The marine sanctuary on Tria Island was established to protect certain marine mammals. Its regulations ban dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of Tria, but fishing is not banned. Currently many fish populations in Tria's waters are declining, a situation blamed on pollution. In contrast, the marine sanctuary on Omni Island has regulations that ban dumping, offshore oil drilling, and fishing within 10 miles of Omni and Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations. Clearly, the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution. Therefore, the best way to restore Tria's fish populations and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon our regulations and adopt those of Omni.'
------正文------
The arguer recommends to abandon Tria's regulations and to adopt those of Omni, in order to restore Tria's fish population and protect Tria's marine wildlife. To support this recommendation, the arguer has analyzed the different situations of Tria and Omni, the former suffers serious fish decline while the latter does not, and then conclude that the decline in fish population in Tria's water is the result of overfishing, not pollution. However, the arguer's conclusion is not reasonable enough to be accepted by ordinary people.

First of all, it is unverified to claim that the decline of fish population in Tria does not result from pollution. Admittedly, Tria's regulations ban dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of the island, while Omni only ban dumping and offshore oil drilling with 10 miles of it. Nevertheless, other factors, such as the extent of such activities and the currents of the ocean, which directly influence the status of pollution have not been examined. If the dumping and offshore oil drilling industries in Omni are much fewer than those in Tria, it is possible that Omni's pollution is lighter than Tria. Or if the currents around Tria push the pollution toward the island, whereas the currents around Omni push the pollution away from it, it is easy to understand that Tria will suffer much greater pollution even though it has banned such activities within a larger area than Omni. As a result, without carefully examine these relevant factors and the quality of water around these islands, it is unsubstantiated to assert that Tria does not suffer more pollution than does Omni, and switching to the regulations of Omni can be extremely dangerous.

Besides, no evidence indicates that the banning of overfishing can restore Tria's fish population and protect other marine wildlife. Admittedly, Tria's regulations do not ban fishing, while Omni bans fishing within 10 miles of the island. However, as no information suggests any characteristics of overfishing in Tria, it is unjustifiable to expect that the banning of fish will help protect fish population of Tria. Moreover, even if the banning of overfishing can more or less restore fish population of Tria, it is hard to deduce that such regulations can protect other marine wildlife.

In conclusion, without further study of the causes of fish population decline in Tria, it is very dangerous to adopt the regulations of Omni instead of Tria's. While banning fishing may not induce any positive effect, reducing the abandon area of dumping and offshore oil drilling can cause more severe pollution and destroy the ecosystem of Tria. As a result, the arguer's recommendation is not convincing enough to be adopted by either Tria's government or common residents.