The Providence Canyon is a natural beauty formed by the abrasion of soil from farming lands. During the mid 1930’s, some government officials attempted to persuade the head of government to transform this land into a national park to attract tourists; unfortunately, the government ultimately rejected this decision for a variety of reasons. However, the government was absolutely wrong in its decision to cancel this offer. Essentially, the government should turn Providence Canyon into a national park.
To begin, the government should approve this decision because the attraction will make a lot of money off tourists. For example, government officials saw that if Providence Canyon was turned into a national park, then tourists might consider spending cash while they visit Georgia’s Little Grand Canyon. This illustrates some of the benefits of turning an eroded landscape into a popular tourist attraction. National parks in general make a lot of money off of tourists visiting, so making Providence Canyon into a tourist attraction would …show more content…
For example, Providence Canyon originally was farmland that belonged to farmers who grew cotton (Georgia’s Little Grand Canyon). This implies that the farmers' land was being taken away to be turned into some attraction for tourists to visit. Although the land was no longer suitable for farming, the farmers of the land would not be very happy to hear that their land was being used. Moreover, the government might’ve needed time to consider an alternative. For instance, the government took around 40 years until they could reach a consensus on Georgia’s Little Grand Canyon. This shows that the government would have taken too much time to decide on whether or not to turn Providence Canyon into a national park. Essentially, the canyon would have been a waste of time to turn into a