Some people think that a huge amount of time and money is spent on the protection of wild animals and that this money could be better spent on the human population. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Governments are facing an ethical dilemma over-allocating resources to protecting wild animals or human population. Some people truly support the latter argument; however, I do believe that money should be spent intelligently to benefit both animal and human population.
The protection of animals should be high on the agenda of every authority. Firstly, preserving wildlife helps balance the ecosystem which is severely damaged by human activities. The number of endangered animals is increasing sharply in recent decades. Once natural habitats are destroyed, over lives are also affected; therefore, it is worth protecting wild animals. For example, if the practice of whaling is not banned, ecosystems of our oceans will be altered forever and it will result in difficulties of thousands of livings who now depend on oceans. Secondly, saving animals also means preserving habitats. Natural rainforests and wetlands are homes of thousand animals. Protecting their lives plays an important role in maintaining those natural resources, which helps reduces disaster like erosion, flooding, drought and the like. Moreover, natural habitats are also the greatest resource for medical and biological research.
Besides, preserving wildlife also benefits human beings since it creates great opportunities for ecotourism. In fact, national parks or wildlife safaris provide numerous job vacancies. The Nam Cat Tien National Park in Vietnam has helped cut the unemployment rate in underdeveloped areas since it creates job opportunities for hundreds of workers. Additionally, governments have great profits from ecotourism as well, which contributes largely to national economic growth.
From all the above-mentioned, although wildlife preservation is a drain on a nation’s budget, it is our imperative nowadays. It is not also a country’s responsibility but also each individual’s.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-12-05 | ophongcute@gmail.com | 78 | view |
| 2023-12-03 | abid1 | 78 | view |
| 2023-10-04 | Afdalah Harris | 56 | view |
| 2023-08-17 | mynguyen001 | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-17 | Linhdung | 73 | view |
- In a number of countries, some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities. others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.Discuss both th 89
- The chart below shows the percentage of the population in the UK who consumed the recommended daily amount of fruit and vegetables in 2002 2006 and 2010
- The table below gives information on average hours and minutes spent by UK males and females on different daily activities. 84
- The charts below show the percentage of water used by different sectors in Sydney, Australia, in 1997 and 2007. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
- The high sales of popular consumer goods reflect the power of advertising and not the real needs of the society in which the goods are sold. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 90
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, for example, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 24.0651302605 50% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1627.0 1615.20841683 101% => OK
No of words: 276.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.89492753623 5.12529762239 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.26393374551 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.648550724638 0.561755894193 115% => OK
syllable_count: 517.5 506.74238477 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 20.2975951904 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.7357411371 49.4020404114 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.7058823529 106.682146367 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.2352941176 20.7667163134 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.94117647059 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.143034944033 0.244688304435 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0447522903737 0.084324248473 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0707863868815 0.0667982634062 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0989656563821 0.151304729494 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.120190010906 0.056905535591 211% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.86 50.2224549098 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.59 12.4159519038 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.49 8.58950901804 122% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 78.4519038076 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.1190380762 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.