The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News:
"The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg. Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. Since they were declared a wildlife sanctuary in 2004, development along the coastal wetlands has been prohibited. Now local development interests are lobbying for the West Lansburg council to allow an access road to be built along the edge of wetlands. Neighboring Eastern Carpenteria, which had a similar sanctuary, has seen its sea otter population decline since the repeal of its sanctuary status in 1978. In order to preserve the region's biodiversity and ensure a healthy environment, the West Lansburg council should not allow the road to be built."
The argument presented is very narrow in its scope and does not evaluate both sides before making a conclusion. The conclusion of not allowing the road to be built relies on the statistics of the falling sea otter population in the sanctuary on Eastern Carpenteria after its sanctuary status was revoked. While the author presents the claim, he provides no actual data to support it.
It might be possible that the population of sea otters have indeed reduced but not reduced enough to worry about. The numbers might still be very much within the safe limits. It is also possible that with some additional measures, the numbers can be preserved. These are some of the scenarios that he author fails to analyze.
Another problem in making the conclusion is that the author fails to analyze the actual problem that caused the sea otter population to decline. There can be many activities which can lead to the population decline. Thorough study needs to be done on the activities that caused it. It is be possible that some of the activities which caused the decline in the population of sea otters in the sanctuary of Eastern Carpenteria might be impossible to be carried out in the sanctuary of West Lansburg due to topological differences. For example, fishing activities in the sanctuary of Eastern Carpenteria might have caused decrease in the number of fish species that are consumed by sea otters. Such an activity might have no consequence on the numbers of ground hog as fish is not their primary choice of meal. Stricter controls can altogether prohibit or prevent fishing activities thereby having no effect at all.
While the author presents the claim of an effect on another sanctuary, the author does not actually study and present the possible effects of constructing a road through the West Lansburg wetlands. The road construction can take place in multiple phases covering only a small part of the wetland at a time and thus reducing the disturbance caused to the wildlife and ground hogs. Additionally, measures can also be taken to safely displace the ground hog population from the area affected by the proposed road plan before starting the work.
Strict monitoring of vehicles entering and exiting through the road, strong fencing throughout the roads so that groundhogs do not end up on the roads, allowing vehicular traffic only during the time when ground hogs are inactive, limiting the number of vehicles to control pollution, setting up emergency response teams to handle accidents involving humans and animals alike are some of the measures that can be taken to ensure minimal impact on the biodiversity and on the population of groundhogs.
Proper research and analysis on similar lines needs to be done before coming to a decision of not allowing the road to be built. Since the author doesn't do any thing of such sort the argument falls short of the convincing factor and needs more thorough insight.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016-11-27 | Sunny udhani | 50 | view |
- The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News: "The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg. Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. Since they were declared a w 73
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 54
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 272, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...the numbers can be preserved. These are some of the scenarios that he author fails to analy...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 288, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
...on the activities that caused it. It is be possible that some of the activities wh...
^^
Line 4, column 305, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
... that caused it. It is be possible that some of the activities which caused the decline in ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 381, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
... involving humans and animals alike are some of the measures that can be taken to ensure mi...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 147, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
... the road to be built. Since the author doesnt do any thing of such sort the argument ...
^^^^^^
Line 10, column 157, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[2]
Message: Did you mean 'anything'?
Suggestion: anything
...to be built. Since the author doesnt do any thing of such sort the argument falls short o...
^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'but', 'if', 'so', 'still', 'thus', 'while', 'for example']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.276391554702 0.25644967241 108% => OK
Verbs: 0.178502879079 0.15541462614 115% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0537428023033 0.0836205057962 64% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0479846449136 0.0520304965353 92% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0191938579655 0.0272364105082 70% => OK
Prepositions: 0.126679462572 0.125424944231 101% => OK
Participles: 0.0652591170825 0.0416121511921 157% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.64103394803 2.79052419416 95% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0345489443378 0.026700313972 129% => OK
Particles: 0.00575815738964 0.001811407834 318% => OK
Determiners: 0.140115163148 0.113004496875 124% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0230326295585 0.0255425247493 90% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0134357005758 0.0127820249294 105% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2939.0 2731.13054187 108% => OK
No of words: 492.0 446.07635468 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.97357723577 6.12365571057 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70967865282 4.57801047555 103% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.388211382114 0.378187486979 103% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.280487804878 0.287650121315 98% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.20325203252 0.208842608468 97% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.105691056911 0.135150697306 78% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64103394803 2.79052419416 95% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 207.018472906 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.469512195122 0.469332199767 100% => OK
Word variations: 53.8573143971 52.1807786196 103% => OK
How many sentences: 20.0 20.039408867 100% => OK
Sentence length: 24.6 23.2022227129 106% => OK
Sentence length SD: 95.3872501962 57.7814097925 165% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.95 141.986410481 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6 23.2022227129 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.45 0.724660767414 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 3.58251231527 167% => OK
Readability: 52.6487804878 51.9672348444 101% => OK
Elegance: 1.90625 1.8405768891 104% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.525791519221 0.441005458295 119% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.16507086092 0.135418324435 122% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0961845585364 0.0829849096947 116% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.611807277229 0.58762219726 104% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.179019586886 0.147661913831 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.243636960638 0.193483328276 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.119851043513 0.0970749176394 123% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.478556936453 0.42659136922 112% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0737669497357 0.0774707102158 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.373214719232 0.312017818177 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0845218318198 0.0698173142475 121% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.33743842365 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.82512315271 124% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 6.46551724138 77% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 5.36822660099 93% => OK
Neutral topic words: 5.0 2.82389162562 177% => OK
Total topic words: 15.0 14.657635468 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.