Issue83 寄托4人组 8.26作业

tangjihedeUID: 2107695

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（1）：
Position: agree.
A. Even a few people could cause serous damage to a remote wilderness area.
B. The destruction of even a remote wilderness area could result in unforeseeable effects on the larger environment.
C. Without government’s protection, even the remotest wilderness area will finally disappear
.（从同主题上copy过来的提纲 ）

Issue83  
------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.
------正文------
Last century was filled with new inventions and technologies that enhanced both the economy and human life; at the same time, however, it also caused serious damages to the ecosystem and the decline of many wilderness areas. Is it the time for the government to preserve those areas, even though many areas are extremely remote from human activities? I agree with the speaker that the answer is absolutely “yes.”

To begin with, the remote location and only a few human activities does not follow that they need no protection, for a few people are enough to destroy the eco-balance of these areas. Although many wilderness places are hard for people to get to, unfortunately, the high marketing profits of some rare, extinguishing, or just wild animals living there are driving people to be there and hunt them. A case in point is the Tibetan antelopes, which live in remote Tibet tableland and whose skin can be used in making luxurious scarves. Twelve years ago this kind of wildlife abounded in the Tibet tableland; however, a few hunters make them become rarely seen in their living places only in no more than ten years. This example tells that even the remote location cannot prevent the damage of wild animals from the avarice of some human beings, and

But why, someone may ask, should we bear the obligation to protect the wild areas? Although at first thought the losing of some types of animals far far away does not seriously influence people's common life, yet the growing tendency will lead disasters even to those who live on the other side of the earth. Take the Tibetan antelopes for example again. In 1998, a terrible flood happened in the area of Yangtze River, one main river originated from the Tibet tableland, and caused a loss of tens of thousands of lives and tremendous properties. Scientists believe that the damage to the ecosystem of Tibet tableland is one major reason for the flood. The disappearance of antelopes leads to a lost of the eco-balance in the whole area. Weeds increase sharply, and then so do the rats; finally due to the overfull rats, the grassland turns into a desert, where without the holding by grass more soil and sand run directly into rivers. The increasing amount of sand in the river, on the other hand, makes the riverbed in the lower reaches of rivers higher and higher, which finally causes the flood. Chinese people have already been taught a lesson what if they neglect to protect the wilderness areas. And this lesson should be learned by all people living on the earth: one should never underestimate the role and function of wilderness areas.

Owing to the significance to preserve those remote wild lands discussed above, the government should obviously take the responsibility of this task. On the one hand, it is one paramount obligation for the government to protest the interest of the most people, while it is just in the interest of all people to protect the environment. On the other hand, facing with avaricious hunters, the moral education or volunteers’ endeavors are not strong enough; only the government, by making laws to prohibit people to hunt wild animals or destroy wild areas, and sending the police to patrol and arrest those illegal hunters, can have enough power to achieve this goal.

In sum, the remote location should not be the excuse for us to neglect those wilderness areas. It is of vital significance for human beings to protect them, and the government should take its duty in achieving this goal.

598 words

meautoUID: 2116250

zhanzhan~~

meautoUID: 2116250

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.
------正文------
Last century was filled with new inventions and technologies that enhanced both the economy and human life; at Atthe same time, however, it also caused serious damages不可数 to the ecosystem and the decline of many wilderness areas. Is it the time for the government to preserve those areas, even though many areas are extremely remote from human activities? I agree with the speaker that the answer is absolutely “yes.”直接就 把题目用陈述句写了，连I AGREE 都省了。Now it is time。。。

To begin with, the remote location and only a few human activities does not follow that theywhat?need no protection, for a few people are enough to destroy the eco-balance of these areas. Although many wilderness places are harduse another word for people to get to, unfortunately, the high marketing profits of some rare, extinguishing, or just wild animals living there are driving people to bedelete to be there and hunt them. A case in point is the Tibetan antelopes, which live in remote Tibet tableland and whose skin can be used in making to make luxurious scarves. Twelve years ago this kind of wildlife abounded in the Tibet tableland; however, a few hunters make them become rarely seenmake them rarely seen..have my hair cut in their living places only in no more than ten years. This example tells that even the remote location cannot prevent the damage of wild animals from the avarice of some human beings, andand what?

But why, someonesome may ask, should we bear the obligation to protect the wild areas? Although at first thought the losing of some types of animalsliving far fardelete away does not seriously influence people's common life, yet the growing tendencyof extinction will lead disasters even to those who livein the most prosperous urbans on the other side of the earth. Take the Tibetan antelopes for example again. In 1998, a terribleanother word flood happened in the area of Yangtze River, one main riverdelete one main river originated from the Tibet tableland, and caused a loss of tens of thousands of我看一个老外改的文章，建议不要这样用，只用一个tens, or thousands of比较好，要不显的夸大。。。和你and后面的也比较对称 lives and tremendous properties. 这里和take Tibetan antelope隔的好远，调整下叙述洪水的位Scientists believe that the damage to the ecosystem of Tibet tableland is onedelete major reason for the flood. The disappearance of antelopes leads to a lost of the eco-balance in the whole area. Weeds increase sharply, and then so do the rats; finally due to the overfull rats, the grassland turns into a desert, where without the holding by grass more soil and sand run directly into rivers. The increasing amount of sand in the river, on the other hand, makes the riverbed in the lower reaches of rivers higher and higher, which finally causes the flood. 这里再把恶果强调一次Chinese people have already been taught a lesson whatdelete if they neglect to protect the wilderness areas. And this lesson should be learned by all people living on the earth: one should never underestimate the role and function of wilderness areas.
Too much emphasis is placed on the example… kind of wordy…
Owing to the significance to preserve those remote wild lands discussed above, the government should obviously take the responsibility of this task. On the one hand, it is one paramount obligation for the government to protest the interest of the most people, while it is just in the interest of all people to protect the environment.这样说还不如说个人和环抱群体难以完成保护荒地这么大的任务。 On the other hand, facing with avaricious hunters, the moral education or volunteers’ endeavors are not strong enough; only the government, by making laws to prohibit people to hunt wild animals or destroy wild areas, and sending the police to patrol and arrest those illegal hunters, can have enough power to achieve this goal.
不如说个人和环抱群体难以完成保护荒地这么大的任务。然后列举下原因：个人和组织没钱，要政府资助。荒地面积大环境险恶，需要专业人员。。。。
In sum, the remote location should not be the excuse for us to neglect those wilderness areas. It is of vital significance for human beings to protect them, and the government should take its duty in achieving this goal.
说理不错。语言可以再整一下。你写了快600个字。缩一百删下重复的词句，效果可能更好些

[ Last edited by meauto on 2005-8-26 at 21:10 ]

tangjihedeUID: 2107695

阅：）