Đề ngày 12/5/2018:
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?
Write at least 250 words
Sample Answer 1
It is thought by some that spendings on protecting wild animals are a waste of time and money and the human developments should be the main investment instead. Personally, I disagree with this idea and believe that wild animal protection also plays a significant role in the human life.
Those who advocate that wildlife conservation is time-and-money-consuming normally argue that humans have few benefits from the development of wild animals. They criticize that the human would have nothing in return by the practice of protecting animal species and their habitat. In my viewpoint, I think this is a very short-sighted view. There is a strong link between humans and other animals, in which we are all living beings sharing the common house called 'the Earth'. So, by conserving the wildlife and wild places worldwide, humans are also protecting their natural environment and making a progress towards the sustainable development.
The protection of endangered animal species, as well as wilderness, will definitely bring certain long-term environmental values to humans. First, scientific research has proved that the wildlife essentially helps to balance the ecosystem and provide stability to the natural processes of nature, such as rainfall, changing temperatures or fertility of soil. Second, in the context of increased detrimental effects to nature caused by human activities, protecting wild animals and wilderness is needed urgently to mitigate global warming. For these reasons, I believe that allocating money for animal protection is not a waste, but instead a significant contribution to the sustainable development.
In conclusion, I am in disagreement with the opinion against wildlife conservation and opine that people should focus on protecting wild animals and their habitat. Otherwise, too much would be lost as a result.
Word count: 270 words
Giáo viên Be Ready IELST - Ms Thi
Sample Answer 2
Some people argue that it is pointless to spend money on the protection of wild animals because we humans have no need for them. I completely disagree with this point of view.
In my opinion, it is absurd to argue that wild animals have no place in the 21st century. I do not believe that planet Earth exists only for the benefit of humans, and there is nothing special about this particular century that means that we suddenly have the right to allow or encourage the extinction of any species. Furthermore, there is no compelling reason why we should let animals die out. We do not need to exploit or destroy every last square metre of land in order to feed or accommodate the world’s population. There is plenty of room for us to exist side by side with wild animals, and this should be our aim.
I also disagree with the idea that protecting animals is a waste of resources. It is usually the protection of natural habitats that ensures the survival of wild animals, and most scientists agree that these habitats are also crucial for human survival. For example, rainforests produce oxygen, absorb carbon dioxide and stabilise the Earth’s climate. If we destroyed these areas, the costs of managing the resulting changes to our planet would far outweigh the costs of conservation. By protecting wild animals and their habitats, we maintain the natural balance of all life on Earth.
In conclusion, we have no right to decide whether or not wild animals should exist, and I believe that we should do everything we can to protect them.
(269 words, band 9)