issue83 同主题 行规,回拍

esmeirasUID：202885

issue83 同主题
提纲:  同意
1: 少数人也能被利益驱使构成大破坏,他国已有先例,政府不能不管.
2. 远地也许是濒危物种的栖息地.
3. 保护生物多样性, 为以后提供科研材料. 何况,政府保护又不是不准生态旅游者进去.

I am agree with the speaker of the statement that government should preserve those wilderness areas even though they are remote and accessible to only a few people. Because wildness areas are refer to those lands that cover a wide area of at least 5000 acres. If the government does not regulate human activities in those areas, even a few people can do great devastation to the ecosystem within them.

Admittedly, leaving the wilderness areas as they were could reduce the government's financial burden. Besides, people could exploit timber, minerals and other profitable commodities from these areas. What is more, some people have claimed that the remote wilderness areas would not be affected much from the few people that exploit it, and even if it is destroyed a little bit, the economic development could make up later. Unfortunately, those kinds of suggestions are not based on the fact. The reality is that the pace of compensation could never catch up with destruction, and the government who neglected to preserve wilderness areas have cause great suffer to environment domestically and internationally. For example, located on the southern part of Himalaya, Nepal is bestowed with vast forests. Instead of preserving these areas, the government turned a blind eye to people's cutting down thousands of trees to make profits .Since 1990s, Nepal suffer from floods every summer because there are not enough trees to hold the melted water from Himalaya. Even though the government and local people plant new trees all the time, but trees need at least l0 years to grow big enough to adjust the floods. Statistics shows that the financial losses brought about by floods always exceed the money made by selling timber because the row materials like timber are usually sold very cheap. There are many developing countries as Nepal are facing this dilemma of boosting the economy and protecting the environment because they are not industrialized and have nothing beside natural recourses to export. The trees are disappearing at a astonishing pace, and the world climate is affected from green house phenomena because carbon dioxide could not be soaked up. On the contrary, although the U.S is an industrialized country, if the government does not preserve those wilderness areas, it is possible that some people would still be driven to make profits in these areas at the sacrifice of the environment.


Furthermore, a remote wilderness area might be the habitat of one or several animals or plants that is at the edge of extinction, and if that place is not preserved, these species might die out. Many countries in the world have set up such preserved areas. For example, China have set up quiet a few preserved areas in the south-western part for panda and golden monkey, and Australia have preserved land in the central part of the country for kangaroo, Koala and so on.  Before the governments preserve those lands, people managed to go to these remote areas and hunted those precious species. Therefore, the wilderness areas should be reserved in order to protect the dying out species no matter they are remote or not.


Another reason why the government should preserve those wilderness areas is scientific research needs so. Science and technology haven't developed to a state that all the secrets and codes of nature are deciphered. Therefore, nature reserve should be established for future scientific observations and experiments. One thing needs to point out that the preserved areas such as national park system still allows people and scientists to get into these national parks for traveling and researching. People are restricted to hurt animals and plants, say, the crab smaller than 5 centimeters are not allowed to take away, they should be set free again. This is the rule that carried out in the Yellowstone, Yosemite and so on.

In conclusion, having considered the long- term effect, the government should shoulder the main responsibility of preserving the wilderness areas even these lands might be remote. Rules should be enforced in order to regulate human activity in these areas. Besides, civilians and societies should make a joint-effort in protecting the environment and biodiversity.

myown5891UID：181125

issue83 同主题
提纲:  同意
1: 少数人也能被利益驱使构成大破坏,他国已有先例,政府不能不管.
2. 远地也许是濒危物种的栖息地.
3. 保护生物多样性, 为以后提供科研材料. 何况,政府保护又不是不准生态旅游者进去.
:hug:
I am去掉 agree with the speaker of the statement that government should preserve those wilderness areas even though they are remote and accessible to only a few people.因果关系不明显 Because wildness areas are去掉 refer to those lands that cover a wide area of at least 5000 acres. If the government does not regulate human activities in those areas, even a few people can do great devastation to the ecosystem within them.

Admittedly, leaving the wilderness areas as they were could reduce the government's financial burden. Besides, people could exploit timber, minerals and other profitable commodities from these areas. What is more, some people have claimed that the remote wilderness areas would not be affected much from the few people that exploit it, and even if it is destroyed a little bit, the economic development could make up later. Unfortunately, those kinds of suggestions are not based on the fact. The reality is that the pace of compensation could never catch up with destruction, and the government who neglected to preserve wilderness areas have cause great suffersuffering to environment domestically and internationally. For example, located on the southern part of Himalaya, Nepal is bestowed with vast forests. Instead of preserving these areas, the government turned a blind eye to people's cutting down thousands of trees to make profits .Since 1990s, Nepal suffer from floods every summer because there are not enough trees to hold the melted water from Himalaya. Even though the government and local people plant new trees all the time, but trees need at least l0 years to grow big enough to adjust the floods. Statistics shows that the financial losses brought about by floods always exceed the money made by selling timber because the row materials like timber are usually sold very cheapcheaply. There are many developing countries as Nepal are facing this dilemma of boosting the economy and protecting the environment because they are not industrialized and have nothing beside natural recourses to export. The trees are disappearing at a astonishing pace, and the world climate is affected from green house phenomena because carbon dioxide could not be soaked up. On the contrary, although the U.S is an industrialized country, if the government does not preserve those wilderness areas, it is possible that some people would still be driven to make profits in these areas at the sacrifice of the environment.讲了很多，但没有突出a few people 可以惹出big problems


Furthermore, a remote wilderness area might be the habitat of one or several animals or plants that is at the edge of extinction, and if that place is not preserved, these species might die out. Many countries in the world have set up such preserved areas. For example, China have set up quietquite a few preserved areas in the south-western part for panda and golden monkey, and Australia have preserved land in the central part of the country for kangaroo, Koala and so on.  Before the governments preserve those lands, people managed to go to these remote areas and hunted those precious species. Therefore, the wilderness areas should be reserved in order to protect the dying out species no matter they are remote or not.建议先讲为什么wildness areas极有可能有濒危物种，然后把政府的介入前后的对比做足， 最后小结说保护wilderness areas对保护濒危物种是很有好处的


Another reason why the government should preserve those wilderness areas is scientific research needs so. Science and technology haven't developed to a state that in which all the secrets and codes of nature are deciphered. 因果不明显Therefore, nature reserves should be established for future scientific observations and experiments. One thing needs to point out that the preserved areas such as national park system still allows people and scientists to get into these national parks for traveling and researching. People are restricted to hurt animals and plants, say, the crab smaller than 5 centimeters are not allowed to take away, they should be set free again. This is the rule that carried out in the Yellowstone, Yosemite and so on.没有把对科学研究有利的原因说清

In conclusion, having considered the long- term effect, the government should shoulder the main responsibility of preserving the wilderness areas even these lands might be remote. Rules should be enforced in order to regulate human activity in these areas. Besides, civilians and societies should make a joint-effort in protecting the environment and biodiversity.