Artic National Wildlife Refuge

In his article “Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Seasons of Life and Land, ” former US President Jimmy Carter builds a highly plausible argument to persuade his audience that the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge should not be developed for industry. Carter develops valid claims using logical reasoning that are backed up with crucial evidence. He is also able to properly persuade his audience by appealing to rhetorical strategies using emotional language to explain why we should protect America’s last truly great wilderness which is standing alone.

Carter uses his words and research to reason with his audience and explain to them why we should not open the hearty of our greatest refuge to industry. The fact that the refuge is a symbol of our national heritage, a remnant of frontier America that our first settlers once called wilderness is an enough excuse. Moreover, there are few places on earth as wild and free as the Arctic Refuge, and it is the only one in America. These past two claims are connected well because they both draw the audience back to the uniqueness and importance of the refuge. At best, the refuge might provide one to two percent of the oil our country consumes each day, therefor, instead we could easily conserve more than that just by driving more fuel-efficient vehicles. These two final claims are well connected because the author stresses the alleged benefits of a short-term economic gain and focus can not outweigh “America’s Serengeti.” These four ideas are successfully connected and convince the audience to join Carter in his fight against industries.

Evidence is a key component of this essay and Carter is sure to include this when presenting us with key facts. Carter highlights that this magnificent area is a s vast as it is wild. For example, it contains from the windswept coastal plain where polar bears and caribou give birth, to the towering Brooks Range where Dall sheep cling to cliffs and wolves howl in the midnight sun. Before he retired, he signed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which doubled the size of the former range and restricted development in areas that are clearly incompatible with oil exploration. Unfortunately, since he left the office, there has been repeated proposals to open the Arctic Refuge coastal plain to oil drilling. These facts back up Carter’s claims that to leave this extraordinary land alone would be the greatest gift we could pass on to future generations.

Persuasive elements are what make Carter’s essay successful. He has excellent ideas and credible evidence, but his use of persuasion are what capture the audience. He appeals to logos when stating all of his claims about preserving the Arctic Refuge in its pure, untrammelled state. But he also appeals to pathos when he empathizes with the Gwich’ins struggle to safeguard one of their precious human rights. He describes the refuge as the most unforgettable and humbling experience. With rhetorical strategies and direct examples Carter is clearly able to persuade his audience.

Carter made the choice and the solution obvious with his persuasive and effective essay. He is able to develop several claims and backed them up with evidence that his audience can trust. After reading his essay, there is no doubt that instead of tearing open the heart of our greatest refuge, we should use our resources more wisely.

...