issue83[Jet小组]第十三次作业

ellefrancaiUID: 2449693

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: 535          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2008-3-7 1:29:08

The assertion said that 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, with which I greatly agree. In my point of view, although it seems no benefits but a kind of wastes preserving such publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state, it actually has significant meanings for government to do so for a lot of reasons.

Above all, concerning the role that some publicly owned wilderness areas in natural state of countries, such as the publicly owned sea, especially those waters close to the country's sea shore, plays in national security, none of governments would abandon their rights of preservation. Moreover, some lands between two countries which have not been clearly claimed for their ownership are also worth to preserve, since it might be threat to either country's security. For example, the army of German attacked France by passing Belgium, which located between them, during the World War I. Surprisingly, Belgium defended themselves for several days which was not expected by generals of German, thus, Belgium won the time for France to prepare for the battle, which later known as turning the scale of the World War I. Hence, we can see the importance of the publicly owned wilderness areas for countries if these areas have the same geographic importance in wars just as Belgium’s.

Furthermore, government should preserve those lands for the resources and some historical resorts located there. It is known to all that there always being some kind of natural resources and historical resorts of mankind in remote areas which are only accessible to a few people or nobody. For instance, the Arctic, some kinds of resources have already been discovered by some countries there and governments of various countries are rushing to build their station for further exploration. Also, different countries are exploring for oil beneath the publicly owned ocean. China and Japan has argued for the ownership of the oil beneath the publicly owned sea between them for years, which shows the significance for preservation of publicly owned wilderness areas.

Moreover, the preservation is meaningful when the space for future development  are considered by governments since the world population are booming recent decades and the space for people to live has becoming a more and more urgent problem to solve. Scientists are studying the possibility for people to move onto the moon or to live in marine because of the pollution, overuse of natural resources and the booming population. Space for living has become a kind of luxury for countries, especially those small ones. We can never forget that space was always one of the main reasons for those countries started intruding other countries, such as Japan in the World War II etc..

Admittedly, preserving publicly owned wilderness areas, especially those areas are extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people, seems to be a meaningless thing for government to do. However, when balancing the merits of whether preserving them or not, it is no doubt that government should preserve them since the preservation just likes investment , the value of the decision will show up in future.