Hi there! I'm reviewing your essay for the WDC Power Review Group monthly raid.
I picked this essay because I have never heard of the concept. It is obviously something you feel strongly about and I commend you for giving a shout out! I hope to help you improve this essay so that you may more strongly influence the masses.
After reading this essay my personally conclusion is that Canned Poaching is a pathetic, disturbing, self-esteem booster. For a person to say they went to africa and actually hunted down that lion, but in reality they just killed one in a cage is really pathetic. I think that sums up the point you are trying to make.
However, I personally have no problem with hunting but only if it is truly done as nature intended. If a person goes out and finds their prey and has a purpose for that prey after they've killed it then I say go for it. But that's not the point of this essay. You topic is that canned poaching is wrong. The problem is that you don't stick to that topic. In the very last paragraph you talk about an animal that is shot and then possibly eaten by other wild animals. That is not canned poaching as you have defined it. My first piece of advice is to go through your work and take out anything that has to do with poaching in the wild unless it is somehow necessary in your explanation of canned poaching. If you want to write about hunting and poaching in the wild then you should write a separate piece for it. Stick to your topic.
Now lets talk about your argument. You are obviously make an argument, canned poaching is bad. But the whole essay reads like an informative essay. You never really say "my argument is". What I thought you were saying is "I'm going to tell you about canned poaching in a really really biased light." That's not what you want though is it? Yes you want to inform people, like me, about canned poaching, but you mainly want to get people to oppose it. You need to tell the reader from the get-go that that is what you want them to get out of this essay.
Here is how you do that.
You need to put you thesis statement at the very beginning, "this is what I think about this topic and what you should think too!" So in this case it could be as simple as "Canned Poaching is a pathetic, immoral activity." Then you can go on to present your evidence as to why people should believe that.
Like I said, this is written as an informative essay, but I really don't think that's what you want it to be based on what your wrote. However, you do need to inform the reader about what canned poaching is in case they don't know. I think you have done a really good job doing that. I think you could arrange it better though.
I like your first paragraph, I think at the very end would be a good place to put a thesis statement. After that would be a good time to go into greater detail about canned poaching. I like this sentence "Canned Hunting for trophies is the cowardly practice of killing helpless animals in small areas with no escape." that's a good summary. Then you can go into greater detail about it. Where the animals are acquired and other technical details about it. It should be written in a detached "this is what it is" tone. After that you would go into the "truth" about it. This is where you would put how you feel about it and why in greater detail than the glimps from the opening paragraph.
Now you must present your evidence, the facts. One thing I noticed about this essay is that it is very biased. Which is because you feel so strongly about it and want other people to feel disgusted in the same way. That is a really bad way to present an argument. People who already agree with you will go "I know I know! It's soo Bad!" but those are not the people you are trying to convince. The people you are trying to convince are those who don't know/care and those who agree with it. Appealing to pity will work with a good deal of the people who don't know or care, but it won't work with the people who take part in it or make money off of it, and those are the people you need to convince.
The other facts you can use are moral questions. If you do some psychology research you might find a study that shows how CP can be detrimental to human behavior or something like that.
What you need to present are facts. With an issue like this it is hard to find technical facts, but they one's you do find should be presented in the most logical light possible, you briefly touched on conservation. expand on that. Shouldn't unwanted exotic animals be bread in captivity so that possible their offspring can be introduced to the wild? Offer that as a solution for those making money off CP, try to come up with a way that those people could make more money with conservation. That would aid in motivating them to change.
Again, try to use as few "pity" words as possible. The people who engage in CP have already moved past that kind of thinking and trying to make them feel that way will very likely just make them angry, or they will make fun of you. Instead try to use strong words (not cursing) not, "you are a sick, despicable person" kind of words, but not passive aggressive words either. "oh killing that big strong tiger make you such a man, even though it was completely helpless in a cage" (hint of sarcasm). Your words should be logical and obvious. You have me convinced that CP is wrong not because you say that it is sad and pathetic and anyone that supports it should be ashamed, but because it is simply the truth. It is not manly, or impressive, and it is certainly counterproductive to conservation efforts.
There are a few things in this essay that simply don't make sense.
The Safari Club promotes the unsportsmanly conduct of the canned hunters.They like to murder animals who are only acting like animals, feeding and taking care of their offspring. Now, every redneck around is hunting alligators. They wrongfully think they are weeding out the populaton, but they are killing the breeders, does that sound right?
I don't see what alligator hunting has to do with this topic at all. You should either better explain it or take it out entirely. Asking if killing the breeders sounds right, well if you are trying to thin out the population that would be a good way to go about it. Instead of asking if it sounds right you need to explain why it is not thinning the population.
When will it stop? Probably never. The cost will just increase and people opporating the so- called sport will get richer. Friendly animas are being mowed down by crossbows and other cruel methods. The exotic animals that are not hand raised are cruelly killed by the cross bow, the hunter's favorite way to kill. It takes a lot of skill to use one.
Telling people that this will probably never stop is counter productive. They will think that there is nothing they can do anyway so why should they care?
Instead say something motivating here. Present it as a battle that we can win, but only if we fight. The bit about the cross bow is kind of irrelevant.
End this essay with a call to action, sum up why people should care and what they can do. Instead of saying the babies will be all alone and the mom will be up on a wall, say something like "with your help, we can raise awareness and give mom lion and her babies a chance to live and grow instead of ending up on some poacher's wall." To me that's much more motivating that an appeal to my pity. I can pity the lion all I want but what can I do about it? Tell the reader what they can do about it.
I was really excited about reviewing this essay for the raid this month. When I heard we would be focusing on non-fiction I wasn't sure I would be interested. So I looked so essays and When I read this I really liked how you are vocal about this topic. My intention is that I can help you better present this topic so that it is more convincing to those who disagree, and also motivating others to do something about it. Keep writing!
|
|