In the United States, it had been common practice since the late 1960s not to suppress natural forest fires. The "let it burn" policy assumed that forest fires would burn themselves out quickly, without causing much damage. However, in the summer of 1988, forest fires in Yellowstone, the most famous national park in the country, burned for more than two months and spread over a huge area, encompassing more than 800,000 acres. Because of the large scale of the damage, many people called for replacing the "let it burn" policy with a policy of extinguishing forest fires as soon as they appeared. Three kinds of damage caused by the "let it burn" policy were emphasized by critics of the policy.
First, Yellowstone fires caused tremendous damage to the park's trees and other vegetation. When the fires finally died out, nearly one third of Yellowstone's land had been scorched. Trees were charred and blackened from flames and smoke. Smaller plants were entirely incinerated. What had been a national treasure now seemed like a devastated wasteland.
Second, the park wildlife was affected as well. Large animals like deer and elk were seen fleeing the fire. Many smaller species were probably unable to escape. There was also concern that the destruction of habitats and the disruption of food chains would make it impossible for the animals that survived the fire to return.
Third, the fires compromised the value of the park as a tourist attraction, which in turn had negative consequences for the local economy. With several thousand acres of the park engulfed in flames, the tourist season was cut short, and a large number of visitors decided to stay away. Of course, local businesses that depended on park visitors suffered as a result.
The author of the reading passage and the professor both discuss the "let it burn" policy. The author mentions that this policy was the main reason for forest fires in Yellowstone in the summer of 1988. However, the professor discords with the ideas mentioned in the reading passage. He offers several reasons to oppose the argument of this article.
First of all, although in the article the author claims that trees were charred and blackened from flames and smoke and smaller plants were entirely incinerated, the professor indicates that the forest was colonized by other new plants, if these plants were destroyed by a massive fire, this forest would have a new place taken over by other smaller plants. Moreover, some kinds of plants won't germinate unless they are exposed to high-level heat. Therefore, the professor actually believes that this fire would give an opportunity to smaller plants needing an open and unshaded area to grow.
Second, even though the author states that this fire caused the destruction of habitats and the disruption of food chains, the professor mentions that this fire would create an ideal habitat for some small animals because some original trees were replaced, like rabbits. Moreover, if these small animals thrive largely, other predators of rabbits will come to this forest, and a strong enough food chain will be formed.
Finally, while the author of the article indicates the fires will have negative consequences on the local economy, the professor can conclude that there were several conditions causing the fire in Yellowstone park in 1988, like decreasing rainfall and stronger wind. Because these weather conditions are unusual, massive fires will not happen each year. As a result, the professor contends that visitors will come back in the next year of 1988.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Most people can solve important problems in their lives by themselves or with the help of their families help from the government is often unnecessary Use specific reasons and examples to support your 60
- Agree or disagree Classmates are a more important influence than parents on a child s success in school 50
- Would you prefer to go to a small university in the countryside or a large university in the city 66
- tpo 33 integrated writing 80
- The government should focus more on improving the Internet or public transportation system 66
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, however, if, moreover, second, so, therefore, while, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1537.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 295.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21016949153 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14434120667 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41337363597 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545762711864 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 470.7 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 1.25165562914 559% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 90.5101283467 49.2860985944 184% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.083333333 110.228320801 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5833333333 21.698381199 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 7.06452816374 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.175800625751 0.272083759551 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0627920990667 0.0996497079465 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0574580632677 0.0662205650399 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108399167421 0.162205337803 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.018246075759 0.0443174109184 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.