It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environments, such as the South Pole. Do the advantages of this developt men outweight the disadvantages.
The isolated natural places are attracted scientists and visitors currently. While I accept that there are some advantages of this trend, I believe that its disadvantages are more significant.
On the one hand, travelling in the remote natural environments is beneficial in some ways. These places have a great value of source information about natural resources. It is undeniable that scientists have discovered several species of animals, plants that are high extinction risk in these areas. As a resulted, scientists and authorities will have measures and projects together in order to protect these such as set up protected areas. Additionally, these places are often attracted travellers who want to experience challenges. An example of this idea is a popular destination namely Son Dong cave in Vietnam, where any travellers try to enroll successfully as a member in this tour.
On the one hand, I would argue that these drawbacks are outweighed by the benefits. Firstly, visiting to remote natural environments can bring much of high risks. There are several hazards can be threatened these individuals. For instance, it is obviously dangerous for people if they can be attackable by several poisoning animals such as snakes, spiders in these places. Secondly, the accessing of these people have increasingly damaged in the ecology-environment system. Much of individuals try to exploit natural resource by logging timber, collecting wild animals, non-timber product forest in these areas. Therefore, the natural resources will be dwindling shortly in near future.
In conclusion, it seems to me that the drawbacks of visiting in isolated natural areas are more significant the the possible benefits.