Some people think that a huge amount of time and money is spent on the protection of wild animals, and that this money could better spent on the human population. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this solution?
In this day and age, it is commonly proposed that in lieu of wasting more governments’ budget as well as time on wildlife conservation, it would be totally more effective to divert funds from this to human population. In my personal perspective, I strongly disagree with this mentioned standpoint. Therefore, this essay will explain cautiously the reasons behind my argument against the idea on favour of reallocating resources.
Personally, the aforementioned measure could be futile due to numerous reasons. First and foremost, the red list of endangered species is increasing gradually. If the wildlife extinction continues, the human may face a huge ecological crisis which impacts significantly on their own survival. For example, if the practice of whaling is not halted, the ecosystems of our oceans will be altered forever, and this may affect fish stock in which several communities depent for a living. Secondly, protecting wild animals means protecting the habitats in which they live, such as rain forests or the oceans. If habitat destruction is ensuing, climate change will affect our capacity to produce food to sustain the growing human population.
Furthermore, the wildlife preserve not only protects wildlife, but also benefits communities with the aim of producing profit from ecotourism. In many countries, on account of environment pollution, there is a growing tendency for people to visit somewhere natural that they could inhale the fresh air, especially wildlife safaris. Hence, the more human protect wild animals, the more they could develop their own life by the ecotourism innovation. Owing to this, I suppose that it is possible to allocate resource intelligently to benefit both aspects, wild animals conservation and human population.
In conclusion, it is clear to me that I disagree with the view expressed in the statement. t is in the interest of everyone to protect wildlife, and creative solutions have shown that this need not be a drain on scarce resources.
- Many people think modern communication technology is having some negative effects on social relationships Do you agree and disagree 81
- Schools are no longer necessary because children can get so much information available through Internet and they can study as well at home To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- Some people think that good health is very important to every person so medical service should not be run by profit making companies Do the advantages of private healthcare outweigh the disadvantages 80
- Scientists say that in the future humanity will speak the same language Do you think this is a positive or negative development 84
- The bar chart gives information about the percentage of females aged 15 25 in a particular country who watch and participate in sports 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 560, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'animals'' or 'animal's'?
Suggestion: animals'; animal's
...lligently to benefit both aspects, wild animals conservation and human population. I...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 92, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: T
...th the view expressed in the statement. t is in the interest of everyone to prote...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, for example, i suppose, in conclusion, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 24.0651302605 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1696.0 1615.20841683 105% => OK
No of words: 316.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36708860759 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21620550194 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0215868648 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.601265822785 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 531.0 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.9148709721 49.4020404114 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.066666667 106.682146367 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0666666667 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.6 7.06120827912 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => 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: 0.219345810917 0.244688304435 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0675288891381 0.084324248473 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0398322619533 0.0667982634062 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130691756372 0.151304729494 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0227178526225 0.056905535591 40% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.77 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 78.4519038076 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.