Issue83 寄托4人组 8-13

bridgewalkerUID: 208595

Issue83  第24篇 寄托4人组！
------摘要------
作者：BridgeWalker     共用时间：55分     483 words (472 words before polish)
2005年8月13日
------题目------
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.
------提纲------
Position: + - -
B1:保护荒地是必要的。（因为1. 环境一点破坏很难恢复。2.野生动物保护。）
B2:但是人类需要的增长要求开发利用。
B3:如果好好利用，一石二鸟。（生态旅游开发和提供环保资金）
------正文------
Should government preserve publicly owned remote wilderness areas? The speaker believes so. However, as far as I am concerned, though it is reasonable to preserve them on behalf of environment protecting, pressing needs from economy should be taken into account. And if being exploited appropriately, these areas can meet increasing human needs at one hand, and keep themselves from damage at another.

To begin with, preserving remote wild areas is necessary according to two main reasons. Firstly, environment is easy to pollute, but hard to restore. Once the natural condition of wilderness is damaged, it would be too hard for human beings to devote additional efforts and resources to repair. It is being aware of this risk that makes the government cautious and hesitating to use it. Secondly, remote wilderness areas are the final habitats for some endangered species. Accompanying with the expanding residential territory of human race, lots of animals have been forced to leave their former homeland, and the remote areas are the last shelter for them. If human race keep on occupying these lands, animals would extinct much faster, and the biological balance in the animal kingdom will become even worse. As a result, our own survival will lie under threats.

However, both the ever-growing size of human population and the development of economy are demanding for more land, and thus lead the government in to dilemma. As the human population exceeding 6 billion, more lands have been utilized to build shelters, more forests have been changed into farmland to generate more corps, and more factories have been established to produce enough goods for us. If not, part of our members would suffer from hunger, homelessness, diseases, and the like. In this sense, exploiting the wilderness areas is justifiable. After all, governments' first priority is to ensure the survival of their own citizens.

Moreover, exploiting wildness areas does not necessarily cause environmental pollutions and ecological imbalance. If we handle it properly and more rationally, the results would turn out to be promising. Firstly, take tourism for instance. The new concept of ecological tourism looms large in recent years. It requires travelers to be more sensitive on environmental protecting, more cautious about the least harm they did to the natural environment. If most tourists are of this kind, the environment of wilderness areas can be preserved the moment they are opened to outsiders. Secondly, proper use of wildness areas can add revenue to local government. In turn, government can spend money on protecting and enhancing the natural conditions there. Through this way, wilderness areas are both prevented from damage and utilized to meet human needs.

In conclusion, when it comes to preserving remote wildness areas, both protecting environment and meeting human needs should be thoroughly considered. If exploit these areas appropriately, we can sustain our current civilization and preserve the natural beauty and resources for our predecessors at the same time.

meautoUID: 2116250

占!

meautoUID: 2116250

Should government preserve publicly owned remote太多修饰，delete remote wilderness areas? The speaker believes so. However, as far as I am concerned, though it is reasonable to preserve them on behalf of environment protecting,protection pressing needs from economypressing economical needs should be taken into account. And if being exploited appropriately, these areas can meet increasing human needs at one hand,on one hand…on the other and keep themselves from damage at another.
开头有点罗嗦。Pressing economical needs calls for the exploitation of wildness areas就可以了。
To begin with, preserving remote wild areas is necessarymainly for two reasons according to two main reasons. Firstly, environment is easy to pollute, but hard to restore.这句太chinglish了吧，怎么象是我写的 Once the natural condition of wilderness is damaged,by what? it would be too hard for human beings to devote additional efforts and resources to repair. It is being aware of this risk that makes the government cautious and hesitating to use it.Aware of this risk, government …其次，题目问的是有没有必要保护，不关心你到底保护了没有，这个句子换换 Secondly,many remote wilderness areas are the final habitats for some endangered species. Accompanying with the expanding residential territory of human raceWith the expanding of human territory, lots of animals have been forced to leave theirforced out of their former homeland, and the remote areas are the last shelter for them. If human race keep on occupying持续占有？ these lands, animals would extinct much faster, and the biological balance in the animal kingdomonly animals? will become even worse. As a result, our own survival will lie under threats.
Extinction of species would be much faster, and ecological balance will be destroyed.
你这一段的中心是：保护公有荒地很有必要。原因1，环境容易遭到破坏而难以恢复。这个破坏哪里来的？要解释下。2，公有荒地是动物最后的栖息地。然后应该说很多物种只在共有荒地找的到。动物对原来栖息地的环境依赖性是很大的，迁徙过去不死料
However, both the ever-growing size ofsize of delete. human population and the development of economy are demanding for more land, and thus主语？ lead the government in to a dilemma. As the human population exceedingexceeds 6 billion, more landsare needed for housing have been utilized to build shelters, more forests have been changed into farmland to generatefor food more corps, and more factories have been established to produce enough goods for us工厂占地，说清楚哈 If not, part of our members换个词 would suffer from hunger, homelessness, diseases, illnesses and the like. In this sense, exploiting the wilderness areas is justifiable. After all, governments' first priority is to ensure the survival of their own citizens.
中间有很多地方值得展开。人口增长的如此之快，他们的需求是如此之大，现有的土地被开发的如此之彻底，以至于不开拓荒地，简直就对不起列祖列宗。。。

Moreover,这里先让步下说存在可能的问题是。。。 exploiting wildness areas does not necessarily cause environmental pollutions and ecological imbalance. If we handle it properly and more rationally, the results would turn out to be promising。 Firstly, take tourism for instance.For example, ecological tourism is a good way… The new concept of ecological tourism looms largeloom?large? in recent years. It requires askstravelers to be more sensitive on environmental protecting, more cautious about the least harm they did to the natural environment. If most tourists are of this kind, the environment of wilderness areas can be preserved the moment they are opened to outsiders. Secondly, proper use of wildness areas can add revenue to local government. In turn, government can spend money on protecting and enhancing the natural conditions there. Through this way, wilderness areas are both prevented from damage and utilized to meet human needs.

In conclusion, when it comes to preserving remote wildness areas, both protecting environment and meeting human needs should be thoroughly considered. If exploitexploting these areas appropriately, we can sustain our current civilization换个词 and preserve the natural beauty and resources for our predecessors前辈都被请出来了。。。 at the same time.
1,有必要保护。
  2，人要用地
住房，耕地，场房都要用地
然后问题就多了
3 我们可以在用地的同时保护环境  生态旅游
问题 为什么搞生态旅游啊
搞生态旅游的话，你住房，耕地，场房怎么办？
      解决2的问题，污染和破坏应该是不能避免的
不解决2的问题，保留荒地原有的样子不是更能保护环境么？税收增加又是怎么回事？
恩恩，第三个写乱料。好象是的。

bridgewalkerUID: 208595

environment is easy to pollute, but hard to restore.这句太chinglish了吧，怎么象是我写的

不是吧？我在Newsweek上见过类似的表达。

动物对原来栖息地的环境依赖性是很大的，迁徙过去不死料

应该已经死了吧？

looms largeloom?large?

新概念上的。

predecessors前辈都被请出来了。。。

:L:L:L:L:L

我感觉B2和B3的确是分离的。如果在B2加入人们旅游的需要可能会好些。