有些零散题目在互改小组的日程之外的，求拍

阿P不说话

125.Some people claim that a nation's government should preserve its wildernessareas in their natural state. Others argue that these areas should be developedfor potential economic gain.

Writea response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your ownposition and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developingand supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.

提纲：野外保护，还是经济发展？

1.      野外保护是必须的。

2.      但经济发展和野外保护是不矛盾的。

3.      经济发展好了长期看更利于促进野外保护。

45min 436 words

Whether to choose wilderness preservation or economic gain is not an either-orquestion. Economy is the fundamental base of a country. A sagacious governmentshould keep balance of the two and harness economy prosperity to promotewilderness preservations.

Though I focus on the significance of economy, I still permit that wildernesspreservation is emergent and indispensable. Human beings have sacrificed a lotof fauna and flora resources for rapid development of economy in the past fewcenturies. We must take emergent action to make up what we have encroached onour sole planet. A photo describing a dying solar bear prevailed on theInternet recently. Paucity of food caused by human hunting led to its death.More and more animals and plants confront extinction. Without enhancing theprotection of wilderness, we will ruin Earth some day, not mention economicdevelopment.

However,wilderness protection is not equal to giving up potential economy gains. Nowadays,a mature mode of preservation requires less economic sacrifice. The two aspectsshould not be regarded as antagonism but complementary. For example, there arenumerous prestigious national parks in America such as Yellowstone NationalPark that is famous for diversity of wild mammals and gorgeous landscapes. Thesetypes of preservations provide opportunities for human to scrutinize buffalos andgrizzly bears, which will weaken the sense of distance between human and nature.Meanwhile, rise of local tourism will promise economic gains. Only through personal experience can people figure out how grandiose the landscapes are and bearin mind that how marvelous the lives are, so that they could establish a more definite concept of protecting the nature in their daily lives. It could be counted as along-term potential preservation.

Furthermore,a prosperous economic base will leave people more room to develop rationally. Human’s well-being will be threatened without economic development. I do not mean that human owns priority over wildlife congenitally. I want to point out that human could be more efficient on preservationwith a better condition, because technology or some NGOs could be developed onlywith enough investments and stable economic conditions. There are only hundredsof pandas in the whole world. This kind of ancient animal species confrontsextinction because of lack in survival abilities. The fertilization rate is toolow to promise panda’s multiplying. Advanced biological technology on cellsincreased zygotes’ survival rates to a large extent, which is supported solidlyby a huge sum of investment in fund and human resources.

Neither blind stimulation on economy nor giving up economicdevelopment because of preservation is farsighted and practical. We need tosolve this issue in a more comprehensive way.

阿P不说话

排版好乱编辑页面上不是这样的……