issue83 G-89-互助社-8.8日同主题写作

tianrushuiUID: 207550

83."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."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Should publicly owned wilderness areas be preserved in their natural state? If so, is it the government’s obligation to take such preservation. As far as I am concerned, it is no doubt that publicly owned wilderness should be preserved, and by governments’ strength.

To begin with, the important support of my view ,that publicly owned wilderness should be preserved is that they, even extremely remote, play an active role in keeping the balance of the nature and ecological system. It is well known that our world is a whole integrity, damage of any part of the ecological system ,even the remote areas, will lead to the damage of the whole world. Take the depletion of ozone layer in Antarctica as example. Due to the wildly use of refrigerator, a lot of gases spread to the atmosphere and thus leads to a thinner Ozone Layer. The Ozone Layer helps prevent unwanted ultraviolet radiation ,hence the temperature of the world is not too high. However, because of the depletion of Ozone Layer in Antarctica, the temperature in this area rises ,therefore the iceberg in this area thaw out and consequently result in a higher level of Ocean, which means a disaster to human beings.  

Secondly, many people may argue that as these areas are remote and accessible to few people, only a few people could do harm to these areas. However this is not the truth. To the contrary, damage in those wilderness areas are rather serious. In Cocoa Syli, a really remote area in Qing Hai Province of China, there is a fairly rare animal, the Tibetan Antelope. The skin of this animal has a very good use of keeping warm, so there is a great demand in its skin in many areas. As a result, many people prey on this animal although it is quite difficult to enter into this area. It is reported that the number of the Tibetan Antelope decreases dramatically.

Finally, is it necessary to preserve such areas by governments? The answer is that without the government, it is hard to preserve those areas scantly by the efforts of non-governmental organizations. Also take Cocoa Syli as example. There is a long-standing non-governmental organization called wild yak team. Although they do many thing to combat with those evil strugglers, their efforts are slim. The first difficulty is that they have no right to punish those evil strugglers. The only thing they could do is try to prevent those evil struggles. However their strength is too weak compared to the strugglers. Another difficulty they face to is that they even can’t ensure their survival. They can’t get money from the wild yak team, meanwhile most of their time are spent on protecting Tibetan Antelope and could not do other things to earn money. It is obvious that with the help of governments, these questions could be resolved easily.

To sum up, due to the analysis above, apparently, in order to keep the balance of natural and ecological system, the remote areas should be preserved and only with the support of governments, there will be some achievements.

AugustsonUID: 166116

大拘泥于格式好像不大容易得高分了~~~~~~~~~~

fairy115UID: 200324

83."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."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Should publicly owned wilderness areas be preserved in their natural state? If so, is it the government’s obligation to take such preservation. As far as I am concerned, it is no doubt that publicly owned wilderness should be preserved, and by governments’ strength.

To begin with, the important support of my view ,that publicly owned wilderness should be preserved is that they, even extremely remote, play an active role in keeping the balance of the nature and ecological system. Ts不妨写简单些，简单明了It is well known that our world is a whole integrity, damage of any part of the ecological system ,even the remote areas, will lead to the damage of the whole world. Take the depletion of ozone layer in Antarctica as example. Due to the wildly use of refrigerator, a lot of gases spread to the atmosphere and thus leads to a thinner Ozone Layer. The Ozone Layer helps prevent unwanted ultraviolet radiation ,hence the temperature of the world is not too high. However, because of the depletion of Ozone Layer in Antarctica, the temperature in this area rises ,therefore the iceberg in this area thaw out and consequently result in a higher level of Ocean, which means a disaster to human beings.  

Secondly, many people may argue that as these areas are remote and accessible to few people, only a few people could do harm to these areas. However this is not the truth. To the contrary, damage in those wilderness areas are(is) rather serious. In Cocoa Syli, a really remote area in Qing Hai Province of China, there is a fairly rare animal, the Tibetan Antelope. The skin of this animal has a very good use of keeping warm, so there is a great demand in its skin in many areas. As a result, many people prey on this animal although it is quite difficult to enter into this area. It is reported that the number of the Tibetan Antelope decreases dramatically.

Finally, is it necessary to preserve such areas by governments? The answer is that without the government, it is hard to preserve those areas scantly by the efforts of non-governmental organizations. Also take Cocoa Syli as example. There is a long-standing non-governmental organization called wild yak team. Although they do many thing to combat with those evil strugglers, their efforts are slim. The first difficulty is that they have no right to punish those evil strugglers. The only thing they could do is try to prevent those evil struggles. However their strength is too weak compared to the strugglers. Another difficulty they face to is that they even can’t ensure their survival. They can’t get money from the wild yak team, meanwhile most of their time are spent on protecting Tibetan Antelope and could not do other things to earn money. It is obvious that with the help of governments, these questions could be resolved easily.

To sum up, due to the analysis above, apparently, in order to keep the balance of natural and ecological system, the remote areas should be preserved and only with the support of governments, there will be some achievements.
文章的语言挑不出什么什么大问题，结构也是，但是觉得有几点不足：
1 感觉写的有点像argu，每段都是先提出一个作者的论断，然后你来批，虽然明显的论断逻辑错误可以这样来批，可是如果每段都这样，就感觉缺少original idea，而且不生动了
2．语言有些中式，呵呵，我也有这个问题！我感觉你的开头,ts都是用的魔板，这样有些不好，我觉得即使用也应该改的华丽点，这个感觉特别新东方的，容易雷同的。