In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river's water and the river's smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is therefore sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities.
According to the latest survey, Residents of Mason had ranked water sports among their favourite recreational activity. Recently, In the Mason Times, it is stated that the state has declared to clean Mason River as it was contaminated. As the government is cleaning up and people are planning to use Mason river for recreational purpose and may demand funds for recreational purpose. However, there are few implications setting the river as a recreational purpose and to increase the budget.
Can the river water be used for drinking purpose along with water sports? Won't the people's activities will pollute the river? Currently, Mason river water is not used for drinking. But, Sometimes Mason faces high temperature in summer which causes scarcity of water. During such consequences, it can be used as a source of water supply. Water sports contaminate the river water and make unfit for drinking. if Mason is used for water sports, then it may be unsafe for consumption.
Will water sports earn enough profits for maintenance? Are the people of Mason of wealthy enough to spend on recreational activities more often? Is Mason a tourist spot? People usually go to recreational places on weekends or holidays. If the river is used for swimming, it needs utmost care, which involves a huge budget. If the recreational place has low numbers of visitor and needs high amount for infrastructure, it might be a great loss to the state.
Cleaning the river will assure it will stink or its water quality will improve? For years, people have been complaining about water quality and bad odour. There can be a possibility, the river has some pernicious water creature which spreads bad odour or harms the water quality of the river. After cleaning the river, the bad odour may persist which may impact the number of visitors. Furthermore, People swimming in the river may get some skin infection due to its water quality. If the water quality improves and it is possible to eradicate the odour, then the recreational spot may be constructed.
In conclusion, the argument has various implications due to its dependency on some unwarranted assumptions. If there is a way to overcome the above implications and provide more evidence, then it is viable to propose increase budget to riverside recreational facilities.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-03-12 | Mishtee Gandhi | 66 | view |
| 2023-08-21 | Kathy_zkx | 83 | view |
| 2023-08-09 | DCAD123 | 60 | view |
| 2023-08-01 | Fortune Quarshie | 68 | view |
| 2023-07-23 | chwj | 80 | view |
- In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports swimming boating and fishing among their favorite recreational activities The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits however and the city park department devotes little of i 55
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Technology has made children less creative than they were in the past 66
- Summarize the main points of the lecture and highlight how the lecture interacts with the text 80
- Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student s field of study 79
- Some people say that the Internet provides people with a lot of valuable information Others think access to so much information creates problems Which view do you agree with 66
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 382 350
No. of Characters: 1880 1500
No. of Different Words: 180 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.421 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.921 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.739 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 123 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 90 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 66 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.917 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.715 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.458 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.339 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.541 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.117 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 409, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...iver water and make unfit for drinking. if Mason is used for water sports, then it...
^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...then it may be unsafe for consumption. Will water sports earn enough profits fo...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, may, so, then, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 55.5748502994 63% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 16.3942115768 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1943.0 2260.96107784 86% => OK
No of words: 381.0 441.139720559 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09973753281 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85256318399 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 204.123752495 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.475065616798 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 616.5 705.55239521 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 2.70958083832 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.4632961974 57.8364921388 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 77.72 119.503703932 65% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.24 23.324526521 65% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.36 5.70786347227 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.272153862488 0.218282227539 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0953473245187 0.0743258471296 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0676735067802 0.0701772020484 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.16042504789 0.128457276422 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0971265950343 0.0628817314937 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 14.3799401198 71% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.3550499002 116% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.71 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 98.500998004 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.