Write better, score higher.
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Write at least 250 words.
😩 Feeling stuck? View sample answers below ⬇️ or get another random Task 2 topic.
Some people argue that all wild animals should be protected to ensure their survival, while others believe that only a select few wild animals should receive protection. Both views have their merits, but I believe that all wild animals should be protected.
Those who advocate for the protection of all wild animals argue that each species plays a crucial role in maintaining the balance of the ecosystem. For example, predators help control the population of prey species, preventing overgrazing and maintaining the health of plant communities. Furthermore, every species has its unique contribution to the ecosystem, and the loss of any one species can have far-reaching consequences.
On the other hand, proponents of protecting only a few wild animals argue that resources are limited and that focusing on a few key species can ensure more effective conservation efforts. They argue that by prioritizing the protection of certain flagship species, such as elephants or tigers, they can indirectly protect the habitats and ecosystems they rely on, benefiting a broader range of species.
In my opinion, while it may be practical to focus conservation efforts on flagship species, it is important to recognize the interconnectedness of all species and ecosystems. Protecting a few key species may not address the underlying issues that threaten the survival of all wild animals. Therefore, I believe that all wild animals should be protected to safeguard the diversity and balance of our natural world.
In conclusion, while there are valid arguments for both perspectives, I firmly believe that all wild animals should be protected. By doing so, we can ensure the preservation of ecosystems and the survival of countless species for future generations.
Some people argue that all wild animals should be protected, while others believe that only a select few wild animals should receive protection. Both views have their merits, but I believe that focusing conservation efforts on a few key species is more practical.
Advocates for the protection of all wild animals emphasize the importance of preserving every species for the maintenance of the ecosystem. They argue that each species has a role to play and that the loss of any species can disrupt the delicate balance of nature. For example, the extinction of certain pollinators can have cascading effects on plant populations and the animals that depend on them.
However, those who support the protection of only a few wild animals argue that resources and attention are limited, and therefore focusing on flagship species can yield more significant conservation outcomes. By prioritizing the protection of iconic species, such as elephants or tigers, they argue that entire ecosystems can be indirectly safeguarded, benefiting a broader range of species.
In my opinion, while it is essential to recognize the value of all wild animals, practical considerations must be taken into account. Limited resources and human capacity necessitate prioritization. By focusing on the protection of key species, we can leverage their charismatic appeal to garner support and resources for broader conservation efforts, benefiting a wider range of species and habitats.
In conclusion, while the preservation of all wild animals is ideal, practical considerations lead me to believe that focusing on the protection of a select few key species is more feasible. By doing so, we can address conservation challenges effectively and ensure the survival of diverse ecosystems and species.
You can submit your essay for free evaluation. We will provide you with your score and give you feedback on how to improve your essay.
Sign in or register to submit your essay.Or view the list of all tasks.