natural areas closed to people?
People increasingly enhance ability to access to remote natural areas thanks to advanced technology. While I understand that critics may see this as of significant threat to nature, I believe that benefits do outweigh drawbacks.
Not only does human exploration of natural world disorder fauna and flora but also lead to dangerous situations for scientists and tourists themselves on certain occasions. Firstly, native wildlife might be destroyed by such human activities as building infrastructure and changing original landscapes. Furthermore, waste left behind after tours contains many materials and substances which are extremely harmful to the environment. Secondly, traveling to remote places untough by people namely deep oceans or high mountains is very risky because of dangerous factors hidden in these places. The more dangerous places are, the more travelers want to reach to there.
In spite of the drawbacks mentioned above, I believe that people, especially scientists, can acquire highly valuable knowledge via studying natural environment. It is undeniable that only by visiting isolated natural places do people comprehend more deeply about how variety of strange creatures survive and grow in the scope of their own environments. As a result, public perception to protect natural habitat could increase by impartation of the scientific study or by tour experience. BBC planet earth series is an excellent instance, the series keeps people supplied with vastly natural information from diversified living environments, including oceans, mountain and the South and the North Pole. In fact, it is unrealistic to require inhabitants to protect ambiguous stuff that they are unaware of.
In conclusion, it seems to me that we gain more than we lose from the discovery of the natural world.
Do You Need