Đề ngày 12/5/2018: Animals vs Humans

Sample Answer 1

It is thought by some that protecting wild animals is 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 human population and wild animals should be equally funded.

On the one hand, investment in human developments is obviously needed since at present human beings are faced with many serious global issues. For example, people in numerous areas over the world, especially in undeveloped countries, are suffering from hunger and poverty, water scarcity, no access to proper sanitation and medical services. More funding can contribute to improving the situation and making human life more pleasant. To illustrate, with better financial investment comes more sustainable jobs created to help the poor earn money themselves, provision of clean water and accessible sanitation and healthcare facilities.

On the other hand, the protection of wild animals and their habitat will bring certain long-term environmental values to humans. To be more specific, there is a strong link between humans and other animals, in which we are all living beings sharing the common house called 'the Earth'. By conserving the wildlife, therefore, humans are also protecting their natural environment and making a progress towards the sustainable development. In fact, scientific research has proved that the wildlife essentially helps to balance the ecosystem and provide stability to the natural processes, such as rainfall, changing temperatures or fertility of soil. 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 and reduce effects of climate change. 

In conclusion, I am in disagreement with the opinion against wildlife conservation and opine that human population and wild animals should receive equal investment.

Word count: 270 words

Giáo viên Be Ready IELTS

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)

Thầy Simon - Nguồn: https://ielts-simon.com/ielts-help-and-english-pr/2015/01/ielts-writing-task-2-wild-animals-essay.html