Animals are at risk of extinction. Some people believe that we should only protect those species that are useful to us. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Animals are at risk of extinction. Some people believe that we should only protect those species that are useful to us. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some contemporary theorists are aligned with a view that since several animals are on the verge of disappearing, efforts and  resources must be invested into saving only the  economically viable. I fail to subscribe to this proposal in absolute terms, for this will prove to be a recipe for disaster.  

To start with, a lobby proposes just focussing on a few species, the governments can save money. This is to say, this will allow more monetary resources for investments into domains that can benefit humans. To corroborate, the money can be utilised in critical sectors: education, healthcare and many more, for the betterment and upliftment of the society. 

However, some strongly resist this and assert that this practice is biased and unethical. Every animal is imperative for ecological balance, and needs unconditional protection, and disrupting this delicate balance  will expose humanity to catastrophic outcomes:  turning the environment into inhospitable. For example, China witnessed a man-made famine during the 1960s, where the crops were ravished by insects. The contemporary regime ordered elimination of sparrows - the  natural predator of local pests - thinking these were enemies of farmers, galvanizing a  stupendous increment in the pest population. 

Moreover, the threat facing animals has been engendered by human activities: poaching, and hunting. Thus, if only selected animals are afforded safeguards, the rest will become vulnerable to such cruel acts - and cause an imbalance in the food chain - in the future since it is human nature to exploit the unprotected. 

In conclusion, disputes aside, one cannot be half pregnant, and only safeguarding animals essential for mankind will jeopardize  the balance of nature, and eventually predispose humans to dire consequences. Moreover, selfishness has led to such circumstances, and panacea lies in conserving every living being for the larger good of the planet. 

Some people believe that wild birds or animals should be forced out of the city, while others think they should be kept in the city. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

 Some people believe that wild birds or animals should be forced out of the city, while others think they should be kept in the city. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

• Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

• while others think they should be kept in the city. 

• Some people believe that wild birds or animals should be forced out of the city, 

Why not let them live in cities

• Cities could prove to be dangerous places for them: they could be overrun, or knoacked down by vehicles or shot by humans under the pretext of self defense.

• They could also pose a threat to the human population. 

 

Why let them live in cities

• It is humans who have encroached their spaces and not them who have invaded human habitats

• They control pests

• Transferring them to other locations could be hazardous not only for them - they might not be able to adapt to a new surrounding, and also the native population of destined location - these beings might transmit disease to them. 

A fierce argument has ensued(triggered) over the issue of accommodating exotic creatures in urban locales. Whereas some are in favor of relocating them to remote locations, others insist upon retaining them. The following paragraphs shall delve deeper into this matter, and emanate its agreement with the latter view.   

An  army of experts is in favor of moving wild fauna away from the urban environment, for it is felt that this step will only benefit these creatures by ensuring their safety. Their intermingling with humans is likely to jeopardize their safety; they are regularly knocked down, or run over by vehicles, on city roads, and in extreme cases, they are either attacked by pet dogs, or shot by residents, on the pretext of self defense. For instance, thousands of monkeys are either bitten by dogs, or killed by speeding cars or gunshots every year across the world, in various cities like New York and Chicago.

Nevertheless, those critical of the former proposal are up in arms and assert that it is mankind that has encroached the habitats of these animals and birds, and thus reserves no right to evict the latter from the spaces they are endemic (originating) to. Such a move will render them homeless and make them struggle to adjust in the alien environment, owing to changes in climatic conditions, food web composition and competition from the natives of those areas. To corroborate, the moose deer was migrated to forests from Copenhagen in 1998 as a part of a pilot project. This experiment proved to be a spectacular failure as none of the 800 animals survived.          

In hindsight, disputes aside, rare fauna are the true inhabitants of regions where cities have appeared, but this aspect does not make them worthy of being ejected from their natural environment. 

The debate surrounding co-existence of exotic creatures with humans in urban locales is the most heated, with some suggesting that the former be relocated to remote locations, others protesting and asserting that these should be allowed to survive where they are. This essay shall analyze both the perspectives and share a plausible conclusion.

Intro 2

A school of thought suggests that exotic creatures should be relocated out of the urban locales, while others protest and feel that they should be allowed to survive wherever they are. The following paragraphs shall analyze both the perspectives profoundly and draw a plausible conclusion.   

Intro 3

It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct (e.g. dinosaurs, dodos, etc.). There is no reason why people should try to prevent this from happening.

 It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct (e.g. dinosaurs, dodos, etc.). There is no reason why people should try to prevent this from happening.

Do you agree or disagree?

The great public discourse of contemporary times is aligned with the matter of preserving animals as many suggest that the permanent disappearance of these creatures is influenced by forces of nature. However, several sections vehemently protest against this opinion. 

Those rallying behind this notion propose that in the past, a myriad of species have appeared and vanished from this planet: they were not able to adapt to the evolving environment that brought about climatic shifts, transformation in habitats and availability of food. Even today, a similar phenomenon is being experienced, and thus,  mankind does not need to expend its efforts and squander its resources on a futile exercise.

Nonetheless,  humans must undertake this endeavor: it is strongly asserted the historical events may have been driven by alterations in the surroundings, but the current events of animal extinction are perpetrated by humans. The insatiable hunger for development and prosperity has led to rampant deforestation. Large swathes of land are being cleared of greenery to make way for agriculture, industry and dwelling areas, robbing wild fauna of their habitat and food, and causing them to die out. 

Similarly, humans cannot escape the responsibility of protecting animal species as it is their endeavors such as poaching of exotic fauna that is leading to catastrophic outcomes. For instance, it has been reported that elephants, white and black rhino, blue whales, tigers and lions, to name a few, are on the brink of vanishing permanently from the face of the earth due to mindless hunting of these creatures for their body parts and other material.

Overall, the given belief lacks substance as it is the society that has caused this disaster, and therefore, the onus lies on it to do whatever possible to conserve various animal species. 

In light of the current socio-economic situation of the world, do you think this is the right time for wildlife preservation? If yes, what are the ways and means you suggest for this?

In light of the current socio-economic situation of the world, do you think this is the right time for wildlife preservation? If yes, what are the ways and means you suggest for this?

In the contemporary era, the conservation and protection of flora and fauna have become a need of the hour since they have started becoming endangered. This essay shall discuss the challenges faced by the wild species and propose the remedies to this pressing global issue.

Nowadays, due to the intrusion of numerous human activities, a wide array of flora and fauna are on the verge of extinction. To suffice the incessant human needs, worldwide deforestation is taking place which is leading to the destruction of natural habitats, thereby making the survival of the species extremely uncertain. Furthermore,  by virtue of the scarcity of resources, the food chain of the species is getting affected adversely leading to the disturbance in the ecological balance, thereby, the extermination of wildlife. Besides this, global warming has given rise to the capricious weather which is accountable for the inability to sustain the wildlife by depriving them the appropriate living conditions to live in.

However, the panacea for these predicaments can only be found by the joint efforts of state and researchers. The government should take initiatives by framing the policies of prohibiting human intervention in the areas that house these species, as well as imposing heavy penalties on non-compliance. Moreover, the establishment of biodiversity parks and reserves and wildlife sanctuaries would render these species a safe and protective environment free from human encroachment. Additionally, this would offer an opportunity to perform research to discover suitable environmental conditions and carry out several experimentations for providing the same.

To reiterate, conserving wildlife does seem to be of paramount importance today, and  it should rightly be done in a haste since if not now, it may be too late. And, for this both the state and society must share the responsibility.  

Overall, fast disappearing forests and rapidly deteriorating climate and environmental conditions makes it imperative for society to spring into action and work to stem the decline in wild flora and fauna populations. If delayed, it will be catastrophic; thus appropriately planned strategies must be jointly implemented by the state and society.

More and more wild animals are on the verge of extinction and others are on the endangered list. What are the reasons for this? what can be done to solve this problem?

More and more wild animals are on the verge of extinction and others are on the endangered list. What are the reasons for this? what can be done to solve this problem?

Day by day the population of exotic species is declining as some of them are on the verge of getting extinct, while many have already been termed as endangered. The reasons behind promoting such a situation are multidimensional. But, solutions do exist to surmount this problem.

Human intervention in biodiversity is growing rapidly at a global level to fulfill various needs and demands of society. Such an intrusion of humans is causing deforestation and exploitation of natural flora and fauna. It is because of this, the surroundings of the forest are getting hampered: creating an unfavorable environment for some wild species, making sustenance for long enough harder; thus, leading to their extinction. Such drastic change causes disturbance in the food web that further exacerbates the problem for other species to continue their survival in absence of availability of food. Therefore, causing exotic flora and fauna to struggle hard for survival while their count keeps reducing.

However, to overcome this challenge, authorities must prohibit human activities of any kind in and around the pristine locations, so that any form of threat to wild species can be eliminated. In addition, several conservation programs and sites such as sanctuaries and botanical gardens must be established that can be used not only for the breeding of engendered species but also treating them. Such arrangements will aid in reviving the number of endangered species and may be able to restore the lost heritage of wild kingdom by performing research and simulating the environment required by those species

Hence, I am of the belief that conservation of wild animals is the need of the hour and if action is not taken now then it will be too late to take a call for their survival.

Wild animals have no place in the 21st century. Some people think that preventing these wild animals from dying out is a waste of resource. In what extent do you agree or disagree?

Wild animals have no place in the 21st century. Some people think that preventing these wild animals from dying out is a waste of resource. In what extent do you agree or disagree?

Ielts Essay Wild Animals 

In recent years, a ridiculous theory is being promulgated about letting wild fauna become extinct to conserve resources. This has drawn a lot of flak from various quarters who question the very relevance and rationale of this proposal. 

Critics of this proposal assert the real objective behind wildlife conservation initiatives is protecting wild habitats, the forests that . These green buffers besides acting as lungs of the planet that recycle the air and also inviting precipitation, act as a vital link with the past. These pristine locations can provide important information on how life evolved, as well as the solutions for the problems humanity is currently facing, and also those may surface in future. 

Moreover,  undeniably, life on the earth depends on diverse components, and wild animals form a critical part of that arrangement: their disappearance would result in great ecological imbalance, delivering catastrophic impact on humans several many ways. As experts suggest, wild fauna helps contain many pests and diseases since all of them are a part of an elaborate food chain. Even if a single element of this table vanishes, the whole system will collapse.

Nevertheless, although, beyond any rationale, many argue that how can public money be squandered on such ambitious projects when the house needs to be put in order. With billions languishing in poverty, struggling to make their both ends meet and access even basic amenities, these programs are a novelty, a passion for the elite who have little respect for those impoverished. 

In hindsight, I strongly feel that under no circumstances should the wildlife be allowed to vanish, it will cause irreversible damage and threaten the very existence of mankind. It is the need of the hour for humans to step forward and act responsibly, and protect their co-inhabitants.     

Some people believe that wild birds or animals should be forced out of the city, while others think they should be kept in the city. Discuss both views and give your own opinion. - Ielts Essay

Some people believe that wild birds or animals should be forced out of the city, while others think they should be kept in the city. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

 

Ielts Essay - Some people believe that wild birds or animals should be forced out of the city

Sightings of wild fauna in expanding cities have raised an alarm among city authorities and environmenatalists alike. They fear unwarranted consequences of such intermingling of humans and wild creatures. Some have gone to the extent of suggesting that wild animals and birds should be  shifted out of cities though there are voicees of dissent.  

Shifting wildlife out of the cities seems to be a viable option, a suitable safegaurd for the wild creatures: instances involving interaction of humans and wild creatures have only resulted in poor wild creatures being at a receiving end. The bahavior of humans has been proven to be quite insensitive whenever these wild beings have intruded spaces of men: they have either shot or mowed down the animals and birds.

Furthermore, presence of these wild beings in the urbanized locations is also perceived as a threat to the public safety. There have been occasions when a stray carnivoran mammal, or bird has threatened humans, and caused distress. To avoid such instances, it henceforth becomes necessary to move such beings out, to ensure that they and humans remain away, at a distance, from each other.

However, many environmetalists consider such a move to be quite brutal in intent: it is humans who have invaded the space of wild fauna. If there is some threat, it is not to human beings, but to those animals and birds who have been stripped of their natural habitats; and now they have nowhere to go. Moving them out of the places might take them nearer to complete disappearance, for it is not clear whether they would be ablt adapt to a new environment successfully.   

To conclude, I feel, that wild animals and birds should be allowed to stay in the cities though in some protected environments.