Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
Wilderness can be defined as any uncultivated, uninhabited, inhospitable area whether forests or desert. The author argues that the nations should enact laws for preservation of wilderness areas in their natural state even if they have prospects of economic gain. While the policy would appeal to environmental activists, animal rights activists, and people with environmental concerns, there must be certain exceptions in its application.
Since, the last century or so after industrial revolution and advances in healthcare, human population has seen an exponential rise. To cater for the consequent need for more industrialization housing, employment and other amenities, forests have been unabatedly exploited for land, wood and other products. This has led to a wide-scale deforestation having drastic consequences. Cutting down of trees - being a natural source of Oxygen and Carbon dioxide sequestration - has a major contribution to global warming. Other repercussions, now very apparent, include polar ice cap melting, soil erosion, low level of underground water, pollution of natural water reservoirs, etc. In absence of any concrete law, this situation is likely going to persist, and then many catastrophic events that threaten even the existence of humans are inevitable as expounded by the ‘climate change’ theory. Hence, no doubt, strict legislations must be in place to protect what has remained until now. Otherwise, the practices ostensibly done for economic gain, and hence human welfare, would bring the very existence of humans to the precipice - let alone their welfare.
In scenarios where wilderness areas would be converted into special economic zones, more and more people will be attracted to fill in the requirements for man power. This in turn will lead to further deforestation to accommodate such huge influx of people. Moreover, the interference with natural flora and fauna, and hence the biotic symbiosis, would bring many animals and plants to the verge of extinction which again poses a big threat to the balance of ecosystem. Therefore, any move to use such natural areas for commercial purposes would result in concrete jungles replacing beautiful landscape; strip a nation from its natural heritage; rob next generations of nature enthusiasts and researchers from the opportunity to cherish and examine exquisite and diverse species; and what not. Certainly, such a loss can never be a wise trade-off with any economic gain.
Some may argue that there are countries, e.g. African nations with acres of wilderness land but still unable to provide food to its majority. Hence, rather than worrying for next generation using wilderness areas for economical growth of the region can ensure the survival of the present one. Interestingly, this can still be achieved through using the land in a manner that is not detrimental to the wild or plant life e.g. development of natural parks. For example, many wilderness areas in Tanzania have been developed into natural parks. This has not only ensured the constant income for local and national economy but also the preservation of those areas through the revenue generated from tourism related activities. Other possibility is the use of desert areas with minimal plant or animal life for say harnessing solar or wind energy.
Another point to support the statement is that no matter how much NGOs work for awareness or other initiatives only respective governments have the authority to pass and enforce laws and hence they are obligated to do the same. However, laws must be passed with caution and specific consideration of different areas. Any general law would prevent even the innocuous use of wilderness land, as described in the previous paragraph, and thus hindering the much needed economic boost. Similarly, different areas must be graded according to their vulnerability and importance for the local ecosystem.
In conclusion, nations must indeed pass laws and enforce them to protect wilderness areas in their pristine form, however, that must be practiced with local consideration and certain exceptions in order to allow non-harmful use of the natural lands for economic benefits of the local population.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 10, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'argues'.
Suggestion: argues
...ff with any economic gain. Some may argue that there are countries, e.g. African ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 162, Rule ID: WORRY_FOR[1]
Message: The verb 'worry' does not normally take the preposition 'for'. Did you mean 'worrying about'?
Suggestion: worrying about
...ood to its majority. Hence, rather than worrying for next generation using wilderness areas ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 218, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
...t generation using wilderness areas for economical growth of the region can ensure the sur...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, e.g., hence, however, if, may, moreover, similarly, so, still, then, therefore, thus, while, as for, for example, in conclusion, no doubt
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.4196629213 169% => OK
Conjunction : 31.0 14.8657303371 209% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 80.0 58.6224719101 136% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 12.9106741573 209% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3563.0 2235.4752809 159% => OK
No of words: 656.0 442.535393258 148% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.43140243902 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.06087906887 4.55969084622 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93859016531 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 358.0 215.323595506 166% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545731707317 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 1135.8 704.065955056 161% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.2370786517 133% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.5225076885 60.3974514979 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.962962963 118.986275619 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2962962963 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.48148148148 5.21951772744 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 10.2758426966 165% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.442290760739 0.243740707755 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112359339243 0.0831039109588 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.102775393195 0.0758088955206 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.243882196094 0.150359130593 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0748317938688 0.0667264976115 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.1392134831 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 12.1639044944 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.69 8.38706741573 116% => OK
difficult_words: 202.0 100.480337079 201% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.8971910112 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.