issue83 高频,大家互拍:)

monkeydryUID: 183691

Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural st
ate, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to
only a few people.
--------------------
What is the correct policy to the dealing of publicly owned wilderness areas?
I fundamentally agree the view that government should preserve these areas in
their natural state.
First of all, those wild places which are extremely remote and accessible to f
ew people are always important to the sparse animals and plants in the country
. As the development of human being society, more and more areas which were av
ailable to the natural lives have been destroyed or changed to peoples' cities
. The very places where they live on have existed in those faraway areas which
can protect them avoiding persons' influence. According to the statistic prov
ided by United Nations, more than 87 percent of total species in this planet a
re living in the natural area, instead of our zoos, and more than 85.4 percent
of them are located in the areas which are hardly accessible to us. What is m
ore, the report points out that the natural way is much better than zoos or ot
her people's methods to live for these lives. This report clearly suggests tha
t if we continue to explore those only-left earth for those species, it is dan
gerous for us to lose those lives who have lived on this globe for millions of
years.
At the second place, the behavior that destroy those areas is also a dangerous
threaten to our own living condition, though they are always remote to us. Ju
st take a tragical story for example. In 1997, many places in South China suff
ered from a terrible blood in Yangtze River which killed thousands of people a
nd caused 27 billion Yuan’s loss. After this tragedy the experts all around t
he nation discovered the reason was the former destroying wilderness in the up
river areas which both contained earth and water. As the disappearance of wild
erness, the function preserves the flood fade away, and then the tragic happen
ed. This example alerts us the remote wilderness is also connected to us close
ly that any slight change there perhaps influences our lives enormously.
Admittedly, in order to meet the need of rapidly development, some small wilde
rness is possibly for people to explore to some new residence. However, before
any action to those areas, enough and scientific research should be taken to
prove that these changes will not influence the species and environment or jus
t slightly. Japan provides a good example for us. It is known to all that Japa
n's circumstance is top around the world. Before any exploitation to wildernes
s, experts from various fields are gathered together by government to study th
e potential influence to nature and circumstance, only after considering all t
he risks and suggesting the solvent plan the project is admitted to begin. By
this method Japan develops its economy as well as protecting their environment
.
Consequently, upon the critical analysis advocated and detailed examples prese
nted that we can arrive at the conclusion that the in order to protect the spe
cies in the world, including us human beings, the government should preserve t
hose wilderness areas in their natural state. In short, to protect environment
is to protect our children.

superkiddUID: 2120413

issue83 高频,大家互拍:)

Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural st
ate, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to
only a few people.
--------------------
  What is the correct policy to the dealing of[with] publicly owned wilderness areas?
I fundamentally agree the view that government should preserve these areas in
their natural state.
    First of all, those wild places which are extremely remote and accessible to few
people are always important to the sparse animals and plants in the country
. As the development of human being society, more and more areas which were available
to the natural lives have been destroyed or changed to peoples' cities
. The very places where they live on have existed in those faraway areas which
can protect them avoiding persons' influence. According to the statistic provided
by United Nations, more than 87 percent of total species in this planet a
re living in the natural area, instead of our zoos, and more than 85.4 percent
of them are located in the areas which are hardly accessible to us. What is m
ore, the report points out that the natural way is much better than zoos or other
people's methods to live for these lives. This report clearly suggests that
if we continue to explore those only-left earth for those species, it is dangerous
for us to lose those lives who have lived on this globe for millions of
years.
    At the second place, the behavior that destroy those areas is also a dangerous
threaten[threatening] to our own living condition, though they are always remote to us.
Just take a tragical story for example. In 1997, many places in South China suffered
from a terrible blood in Yangtze River which killed thousands of people and
caused 27 billion Yuan’s loss. After this tragedy the experts all around the
nation discovered the reason was the former destroying wilderness in the up[upstream]
river areas which both contained earth and water[好像语法有点问题]. As the disappearance of wilderness,
the function preserves the flood fade[faded] away, and then the tragic happen
ed. This example alerts us the remote wilderness is also connected to us closely
that any slight change there perhaps influences our lives enormously.[不知道你是不是想用so….that句型]
Admittedly, in order to meet the need of rapidly[rapid] development, some small wilderness
is possibly[necessary] for people to explore to some new residence. However, before
any action to those areas, enough and scientific research should be taken to
prove that these changes will not influence the species and environment or jus
t slightly. Japan provides a good example for us. It is known to all that Japan's
circumstance is top around the world. Before any exploitation to wilderness,
experts from various fields are gathered together by government to study the
potential influence to nature and circumstance, only after considering all the
risks and suggesting the solvent plan the project is admitted to begin. By
this method Japan develops its economy as well as protecting their environment
.
  Consequently, upon the critical analysis advocated and detailed examples presented
that we can arrive at the conclusion that the in order to protect the spe
cies in the world, including us human beings, the government should preserve t
hose wilderness areas in their natural state. In short, to protect environment
is to protect our children.[总结没有把让步段归进去，最后一句煽情有点突兀]
  [总体来说觉得楼主这篇文章较前几篇有一点退步，语法错误也多了]

Chloroplast923UID: 207486

What is the correct policy to the dealing of publicly owned wilderness areas?
I fundamentally agree the view that government should preserve these areas in
their natural state.
First of all, those wild places which are extremely remote and accessible to few people are always important to the sparse animals and plants in the country
. As the development of human being society, more and more areas which were available to the natural lives have been destroyed or changed to peoples' cities
. The very places where they live on have existed in those faraway areas which
can protect them avoiding persons' influence. According to the statistic provided by United Nations, more than 87 percent of total species in this planet a
re living in the natural area, instead of our zoos, and more than 85.4 percent
of them are located in the areas which are hardly accessible to us. What is m
ore, the report points out that the natural way is much better than zoos or other people's methods to live for these lives. This report clearly suggests that if we continue to explore those only-left earth for those species, it is dangerous for us to lose those lives who have lived on this globe for millions of
years.
At the second place, the behavior that destroy those areas is also a dangerous
threaten to our own living condition, though they are always remote to us. Just take a tragically story for example. In 1997, many places in South China suffered from a terrible blood[flood] in Yangtze River which killed thousands of people and caused 27 billion Yuan’s loss. After this tragedy the experts all around t
he nation discovered that the reason was the former destroying wilderness in the upriver areas which both contained earth and water. As the disappearance of wilderness, the function preserves the flood fade away, and then the tragic happened. This example alerts us the remote wilderness is also connected to us closely that any slight change there perhaps influences our lives enormously.
Admittedly, in order to meet the need of rapidly development, some small wilderness is possibly for people to explore to some new residence. 因为是很偏远的荒地,住人可能不大方便吧?However, before
any action to those areas, enough and scientific research should be taken to
prove that these changes will not influence the species and environment or jus
t slightly. Japan provides a good example for us. It is known to all that Japan's circumstance is top around the world. Before any exploitation to wilderness, experts from various fields are去掉 gathered together by government to study the potential influence to nature and circumstance, only after considering all the risks and suggesting the solvent plan the project is admitted to begin. By
this method Japan develops its economy as well as protecting their environment你在这一段里都没怎么提到经济啊, 也没说经济和环境保护是对立的,突然这样一句有点突兀..
Consequently, upon the critical analysis advocated and detailed examples presented that we can arrive at the conclusion that the in order to protect the species in the world, including us human beings, the government should preserve those wilderness areas in their natural state. In short, to protect environment is to protect our children.最后一句有点怪.