Large draw many people numbers of visitors can endanger ancient archeological sites such as Machu Picchu. In your opinion, is it more important to try to preserve such sites or to allow public access to them? Support own your opinion with reasons and examples from your knowledge or experience

Logical sites have always attracted mankind. their uniqueness makes them a true marvel. on the country it is our duty and responsibility to protect and preserve such sites at any cost. firstly these sites are a hub of scientific and cultural knowledge these sides hold treasures to evolutionary origins they are true markers of hard work and the intelligence of human ancestors through carbon dating we can come to know about the form of architectural materials used those days these sites also contain knowledge of cultural development in a region secondly such sites can often act as habitat for a variety of exotic birds animals insects and trees almost all ancient archaeological sites have secured many trees and animals in their premises hence preserving these sites can protect endangered animals by giving them their habitat another important factor in the support of preserving such sites is the revenues on through them if these sides are well maintained it lets the archaeological teams to study the site well by doing so a country excels in research and their help to boost the economy caretakers sweepers cleaners at 17 also with their daily but from the sides all-in-all I allowing restricted at monitor public access can result in loss or degradation of a stunning sites hence it is our duty to preserve such sites in the first place