The author of the issue highlights that it is incumbent upon the government to enact flexible laws in order to protect wilderness area. Due to the controversial nature of this question, there is not a general argument on this issue. I am, however, to a great extent of the conviction that protection of these areas not only can be helpful to the entire world and human beings but also can be useful for many species that extinction threatens their presence. The aim of this essay is to put forward some cogent reason to shed light on a number of issues in this framework.
To commence with, the earth has been developed enormously with the advent of sophisticated technology. Parallel to this, greenhouse effect, deforestation, drought, contamination of water and so forth, are the fatal consequences of human activities that put the world in a vulnerable situation. Broadly speaking, these harmful activities definitely have deleterious effects on the wilderness areas and it is the responsibility of nations to take them into consideration. As a vivid example, if the government neglect enacting laws, we will soon witness more destructive behaviors by human beings like erect buildings in these areas. Wilderness areas are the essence and territory of any given country and the government should bend over backward to preserve them successfully. To elucidate more on this issue, if the government pass the buck and does not legislate useful laws to protect wilderness, we would wait for a barren desert.
Another salient point in corroborating my viewpoint is the fact that wilderness areas are the home of vast majorities of animal species. If we take a minute to ponder over it, not only can flexible laws preserve wilderness areas but also can protect crowds of species especially endangered species. Arguably, these species are the inseparable part of our wilderness area and destruction of these territories could have pernicious effects on the life of myriads of species. It can be deduced from a combination of breadth of coverage and depth of detail that flexible laws not only will preserve such important areas but also will protect the habitat of many different species.
However, what was alluded to above can' t be overgeneralized to all contexts. Alongside with the innumerable benefits, it has, indisputably, the law should be flexible enough to let the human beings make the best use of these areas. As a tangible example, there are hundreds of hungry mouth in the different part of the world like some African Countries. So, the government should permit these people to use these lands for agricultural purpose and plant crops, rice and so forth. In this way, not only can hungry mouth feed themselves but also can be beneficial for the government and provide an opportunity for them to accumulate a hoard of money, finally, make the economy prosperous. However, it was a story in a nutshell; actually, there are more reasonable grounds that can lend weight to my personal viewpoint.
In light of reasons elaborated, I reiterate that
The author of the
issue
highlights that it is incumbent upon the
government
to enact
flexible
laws
in order to
protect
wilderness
area
. Due to the controversial nature of this question, there is not a general argument on this
issue
. I am,
however
, to a great extent of the conviction that protection of these
areas
not
only
can be helpful to the entire world and
human
beings
but
also
can be useful for
many
species that extinction threatens their presence. The aim of this essay is to put forward
some
cogent reason to shed light on a number of
issues
in this framework.
To commence with, the earth has
been developed
enormously
with the advent of sophisticated technology. Parallel to this, greenhouse effect, deforestation, drought, contamination of water and
so
forth, are the fatal consequences of
human
activities that put the world in a vulnerable situation.
Broadly
speaking, these harmful activities definitely have deleterious effects on the
wilderness
areas
and it is the responsibility of nations to take them into consideration. As a vivid example, if the
government
neglect enacting
laws
, we will
soon
witness more destructive behaviors by
human
beings like erect buildings in these
areas
.
Wilderness
areas
are the essence and territory of any
given
country and the
government
should bend over backward to preserve them
successfully
. To elucidate more on this
issue
, if the
government
pass the buck and does not legislate useful
laws
to
protect
wilderness
, we would wait for a barren desert.
Another salient point in corroborating my viewpoint is the fact that
wilderness
areas
are the home of vast majorities of animal species. If we take a minute to ponder over it, not
only
can
flexible
laws
preserve
wilderness
areas
but
also
can
protect
crowds of species
especially
endangered species.
Arguably
, these species are the inseparable part of our
wilderness
area
and destruction of these territories could have pernicious effects on the life of myriads of species. It can
be deduced
from a combination of breadth of coverage and depth of detail that
flexible
laws
not
only
will preserve such
important
areas
but
also
will
protect
the habitat of
many
different
species.
However
, what
was alluded
to above
can&
#039; t
be overgeneralized
to all contexts. Alongside with the innumerable benefits, it has,
indisputably
, the
law
should be
flexible
enough
to
let
the
human
beings
make
the best
use
of these
areas
. As a tangible example, there are hundreds of hungry mouth in the
different
part of the world like
some
African Countries.
So
, the
government
should permit these
people
to
use
these lands for agricultural purpose and plant crops, rice and
so
forth. In this way, not
only
can hungry mouth feed themselves
but
also
can be beneficial for the
government
and provide an opportunity for them to accumulate a hoard of money,
finally
,
make
the economy prosperous.
However
, it was a story in a nutshell; actually, there are more reasonable grounds that can lend weight to my personal viewpoint.
In light of reasons elaborated, I reiterate that