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?
The present day is the age of contradictions of opinions, inventions, and actions. As if to exemplify, the civilized man pampers the wilderness while devouring it. But this paradox is practically inevitable since we exploit the wild for sustenance and, hence, we must sustain it for our continued future. So, regardless of economics or societal factors, wild life must be preserved at any and all times. We must conserve, and cohabit with, the wild which, in fact, will preserve it in the long run.
It is true that for us to survive we must exploit the environment and all life in it. So preservationist campaigns that suggest leaving the wilderness alone or becoming a part of it has not been so popular and viable. A wiser approach is conservation, using the God sent resources sparingly like fiscal savings. Being wasteful, in any facet of life, is reproachable, and same goes for wild life. If we exploit nature only so economically that we obtain our nourishment while keeping her so sound that she continues bearing fruit, we will be best off, as not only us, but also generations to come will have sustained this way. Being wasteful and destructive will only usurp the natural resources catastrophically faster which may cause the untimely demise of all humans.
Also, if we keep the spirit of harmony and learn to cohabit with wild life, all may live. This planet is in fact big enough for sustaining all life. So, being destructive to that which does not fight back is foolish, especially when the non-aggressor is our sole source.
To conclude, here, we should never be scrutinizing whether it is the right time for preserving wild life because any time is a good time, and, practically, the only time, for guaranteeing that nature sustains so that she withholds us and others with nurturing care.
| The animal species are becoming extinct due to human activities on land and in the sea. What are the reasons and solutions? |
It is widely argued that many kinds of animals are disappearing due to human actions on the ground and in the ocean. There are a number of reasons behind this issue and several solutions should be proposed to prohibit these negative behaviors/protect wildlife.
There are two primary reasons why many species are on the verge of extinction. One reason is that mankind is heavily polluting the environment, which causes the death of many animals. Pollution in many forms such as garbage or poisonous chemicals are the biggest threats to the habitats. For instance, many aquatic animals are endangered as a result of the toxic waste released from factories into the rivers and the ocean or many sea animals have been found dead with full of plastic garbage in their stomach. Another reason for this problem is overhunting. A thousand of animals extinction stems from the economic purpose of humans. For example, the number of elephant in the world is falling dramatically because they have been illegally hunted for their valuable ivory.
However, measures must be taken by the governments and international bodies to tackle these detrimental/negative activities. Firstly, the governments must take action on protecting wildlife. It is unquestionable that the animal is an essential part of life and this important point ought to be more promoted through official media. Besides, it is crucially significant to improve public awareness of environmental and animal management. Secondly, international bodies such as World Wildlife Fund and Interpol should collaborate together to preserve endangered animals. Furthermore, illegal hunters must be arrested and hold accountability for their criminal actions and more wildlife sanctuary should be built to keep threatened animals safe.
In conclusion, it is clear that there are various reasons for the disappearing/disappearance of many species, and steps need to be taken to solve this problem.
| Some people claim that it is acceptable to use animals in medical research for the benefit of human beings, while other people argue that it is wrong. Discuss both views and give your opinion. |
Animals are one of the most vital parts of the Earth. It is generally said that animals can be used for researching medicine while others think it is unethical to do medical experiments on animals. Personally, I believe that people should not use animals for scientific discovery. I
t is unquestionable that animal plays an essential role in finding cures for human’s diseases. Indeed, animal’s body contains some substances that prevent the development of harmful virus in human’s body. Moreover, several species such as apes, monkeys have nearly the same structure with people, which helps scientists do experiences without injuring people. Furthermore, apart from animals, there are no creatures which are appropriate for medical research. Therefore, it is likely accepted choice to use animals for activities related to medicine and find the best way to cure people’s diseases.
On the other hand, it will not be logical if scientists take advantage of animals to satisfy human’s needs/demands. In fact, it is no doubt that animal is also living creatures like people. Also, they have feelings and they need to be respected by humans. Thus, using animals for medical research is a cruel action. In addition, this way can cause many wild species on the verge of extinction. For example, bears in Vietnam are on the edge of disappearance forever because of their bear gall which is said to be good for people’s health.
In conclusion, medical research is significantly necessary for the development of people and the world. However, using animals for discovering medicine is not suitable despite the huge advantages they bring about.
| Animal species are becoming extinct as a result of human activities on land and in the sea. Why has this happened? What’s the solution? |
One of the most rising concerns among human beings nowadays is the extinction of some animals which stems from the human’s development. Acknowledging how serious the problem is, people from all walk of life including politics, scientists, or students have done dozens of researches/research on the causes and solutions for this issue, some of which are mentioned below.
In terms of the causes, the uncontrolled population growth is named for one of the reasons which brings about the loss of animal’s natural habitat. Overpopulation means the rise in the human’s needs for land. That is why forests have been cut down to build residential areas and to change to agriculture land as well. Animals, as a result, have nowhere to shelter, so it is apparently a matter of time that they become extinct. Another human factor impacting on the condition for surviving/ the survival of animal species comes from climate change, a consequence of industrialization. It is undeniable that animals are so sensitive that even a little change in temperature can make a huge effect on their lives. Meanwhile, the globe has been warming and is predicted to be warmer in the next decades. The worry about another historic disappearance like dinosaurs would be repeated, therefore, does make sense.
Luckily, awareness of environmental protection in general and wildlife conservation in specific has been risen recently, which leads to numerous ways being proposed and conducted to save animals. One of them is the population policy which aims to ensure population growth rate does not affect animals’ survivals. Additionally, there is a tireless exertion among citizens, environmentalists, and politicians in dealing with global warming including stimulating promises in reducing unfriendly environmental practices.
In conclusion, humans and their innovations have affected animals and the environment at large through a wide range of activities. Making up/Compensation for these victims has been taking into account heavily by conducting hundreds of solutions so far.
| 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? |
In recent times, the increasing number of endangered animals has been in the limelight and has aroused wide concern for the pernicious effects associated with them. This alarming trend emerges as a result of several factors and although some people may argue that there is no way back, workable solutions that can be applied by both individuals and governments are available/possible/likely.
The rising figure of endangered creatures could be ascribed to numerous reasons. An obvious explanation lies in the lack of knowledge in the general population. Indeed, a myriad of elephants in Africa die every year on the account of some beliefs that ivory could alleviate or cure many kinds of chronic diseases such as tendinopathy, arthritis. This misunderstanding leads to the increase of ivory’s supply so that hundreds of elephants have been slaughtered by hunters. Besides, the inefficiency of current protective methods by public bodies greatly exacerbates the situation. Instead of investing their budget into preserving endangered animals, the authorities have been allocating most of the budget to extravagant projects namely space exploration or nuclear weapons’ experiments. Thus, many countries do not have the facilities and amenities necessary to protect wild animals.
In the face of the escalating perils from the extinction of endangered animals, some measures can be taken to mitigate the problem. The first practical solution at the moment is to amend the educative curriculum, which can be achieved by the Departments of Education. They should improve current teaching programs concerning conserving wild animals. Not only will they be able to educate the youngsters, but they will also convey the idea of animal protection more effectively. At the same time, the more effective policies to be executed by governments act as a sustainable answer to the issue. Government authorities should spend more money conserving/saving endangered animals. Moreover, they should legislate law more strictly and punish the offenders more seriously. If such preventive actions are implemented, the verge of wild animals’ extinction will dip while people can still bask in the glory of the modern living standard.
All existing data provide a concrete foundation that the edge of endangered 329 creatures’ extinction derives from the lack of knowledge of general citizens and the inefficient investment by authorities. In order to tackle the problem, solutions such as improving the education systems or spending more money on wild animals should be carried out.
| A growing number of people feel that animals should not be exploited by people and that they should have the same rights as a human, while others argue that humans must employ animals to satisfy their various needs, including use for foods and research. Discuss both views and give your opinion. |
It is argued that animals should have equal rights as a human being or should be used for human’s purposes. While some individuals suggest that animals should be protected by laws of animal rights, I would argue that it would be better to employ animals appropriately and effectively to improve our quality of life.
On the one hand, some people think that animals should be protected by laws because they have equal rights as human living together on the earth. Firstly, if they don’t do anything damaging or harmful to humans’ lives, we should respect them and do not do anything that might threaten their existences. It is obvious that animals help to balance our eco-system and make our nature becomes more diverse. Secondly, some animals are our good friends from a long time ago. For example, dogs and cats can live with people as their friends and make us happy and safe. Eventually, dogs can help people hunting and play as guards to protect poultries in farms.
On the other hand, it would be more useful if we can employ animals appropriately for specific purposes such as food source and research. Firstly, animals should be used effectively to provide sufficient nutrition for our daily diet. We cannot have enough energy and muscles without eating fish and meat. Secondly, animals should be used effectively in some experiments that couldn’t be carried out on humans. For example, rats and rabbits are used quite often in vaccination laboratories to help human find out the appropriate vaccine to against serious diseases such as malaria, HIV, and flu. Thirdly, if humans don’t intervene the animals’ development, they might increase very fast and will have negative effects on human. One good example of this is the act of controlling the number of kangaroos in Australia in order to keep their population grows at a safe level for human being and ecosystem.
To sum up, animals should be protected by animal rights as well as used appropriately in order to maintain a balance of the eco-system and usefully served some specific human’s purposes.
Model 2
Advocates of animal rights argue against experimenting on animals, as it is heartless and brutal, whereas scientists assert that animal experimentation is justifiable if used to produce medicines that improve the healthcare industry. This essay will discuss both views, followed by my humble opinion.
Protesters of the anti-animal testing movement base their argument on moral reasons. To commence, it is cruel to keep wild animals in captivity and deprive them of contact with their peers. Common experimental creatures such as rabbits, monkeys, and rats are conditioned to the laboratory environment. They live alone in small cages with little space to move around and are not exposed to natural sunlight and left in hunger, all to serve the purpose of experimentation. Furthermore, it is absolutely inhumane to perform dangerous testing on these creatures. For one successful medicine, there are over a hundred lives of rodents affected. These laboratory mice are either dead, suffer from severe deformation, or are released back into their natural habitats. However, only a few released mice lived, as they lack survival skills due to a long period of time in captivity.
On the other hand, scientists insist that it is reasonable to sacrifice these animals’ lives to develop new antidotes for humans. Firstly, supporters of animal experimentation claim that rodents are under the risks of overpopulation. Therefore, it is acceptable to use some of them to perform testing on. Researchers have shown that there is an abundant number of mice and rabbits, and therefore, by injecting them with new drugs, they are actually helping to maintain the balance in the ecosystem. Secondly, as proponents of animal testing consider men’s lives superior to other beings, they find it fair to take advantage of less intelligent creatures for scientific purposes. Because of mankind’s high position in the food chain, they maintain that it is quite natural to use these animals for their own benefits. Moreover, as experimentation on animals helps tremendously with the medical industry and ensures safety and better health for human, it is simply logical to sacrifice these creatures.
In conclusion, I agree that testing on animals is inadvisable because of its cruelty. However, in case of absolute necessity, researchers should be allowed to select some creatures that are already in bad shape to assist them with the development of a new cure.
| Some people say that too much attention and too many resources are given in the protection of wild animals and birds. Do you agree or disagree? |
It is argued that today people put a huge amount of attention and a great number of resources to the protection of wild species. I completely disagree with this point of view. In my opinion, this is absurd to argue that people/governments are putting enough attention to the protection of wild animals and birds.
In fact, humans are more likely to destroy the wildlife than protecting them. Natural habitats are gradually vanished due to the negative effects of human activities on wildlife. Furthermore, humans are responsible for climate change, stemming from the development of industrial revolution; therefore, wild species can hardly adapt to the dramatic change of climate. Actions need to be taken in order to protect wild animals and birds immediately. For example, International conference on wildlife protection is necessary for countries to collaborate on searching an optimal way to protecting animals as well as making people more aware of the importance of wildlife conservation.
I also disagree with the idea that there are too many resources are given in the protection of wild animals and birds. Building new wildlife sanctuaries is an essential way to protect wild species. If there was no safe place for animals, they would be easily vulnerable to the negative effects of climate change and human activities. Furthermore, hiring more forest guards can ensure the survival of animals from illegal wildlife trade. Those resources given to the protection of animals are necessary in order to keep the natural balance of all lives on earth.
In conclusion, attention and resources are needed for the survival of wild species, and I believe that every effective method must be taken/conducted to protect them.
Model 2
It is argued that the conservation of wild animals and birds has attracted much attention and resources from the public. I strongly disagree with this opinion.
Firstly, the attention that the community has paid to wildlife habitats seems to be insufficient. It is undeniable that the public nowadays tend to be interested in news about celebrities and movies rather than wildlife preservation. Thus, in order to meet the demand and expectation of the majority, the mass media gives priority to broadcasting TV programmes like romantic films and game shows which have the attendance of famous people and to ignore wildlife news. Furthermore, the laws about animal rights, which have been loosely enforced due to the lack of governments’ attention, is also a contributing factor to the extinction of wild animals and birds.
Secondly, I believe that allocating more resources to protect wild habitat is not a waste of money. One reason for this is that the presence of wild animals and birds make a significant contribution to a balanced ecosystem and the beauty of natural environment. In fact, there are many tourists attracted by endangered species and this could help the citizens living nearby the wildlife environment to earn money for raising their families. Another reason is that people are using various medicines which are used to cure some serious diseases stemming from substances produced by wild animals. Therefore, if the animals are gone, there is no chance for humans to study and produce valuable medicines from us.
In conclusion, with what I have mentioned above, I completely believe that the public should pay more attention and allocate more budget to protect wild animals due to benefits they bring to humans’ lives.
| Nowadays animal experiments are widely used to develop new medicines and to test the safety of other products. Some people argue that these experiments should be banned because it is morally wrong to cause animals to suffer, while others are in favour of them because of their benefits to humanity. Discuss both views and give your own opinion? |
It is true that medicines and other products are routinely tested on animals before they are cleared for human use. There are many arguments for and against the idea of animal testing for new drugs or domestic products, causing public controversy. Although some suggest that animal should be used for new products testing because it benefits human, I am inclined to the view that these experiments should be banned as they are ethically unacceptable, except for the medical purpose.
Proponents of the former standpoint claim that if animals were used in laboratory tests, especially in medical ones, hardly anyone will die of smallpox, polio or rabies anymore. This means that vaccines would help to wipe them out, and without animal testing, we would not have vaccines. Therefore we need animal experiments to find vaccines and let scientists try out new medical techniques, such as heart transplants. Furthermore, they may aware that by doing these tests, some animal will get hurt, or even die, however, it saves thousands of human lives, so it is really important. These points cannot be recovered by any support from animal – rights activists.
In animal – rights advocates perspective, animal’s experience in the experiment should be banned due to animal suffering. They suppose that animals have feelings, just like humans, animals get hungry and thirsty and they feel fear and pain, so the lives of animals should be respected. In addition, many animal experiments are performed for non-medical products, including domestic ones, which is morally wrong and unfair to put animal’s lives at risk for human while there are alternative non-animals methods of testing. For instance, computerized human – patient simulators and In vitro testing, which is defined as a research using human cells and tissue, can be used instead of using animals.
In conclusion, animal testing should be limited and only used for medical purpose. Governments and authorities should focus more on developing non-animal methods and ensuring animal rights as well as human.
Model 2
During the development of medicines and other products, many test on animals were carried out. Some people think that these experiments make the animals suffer and should be prohibited, while others support them because of the benefits they brought. In my opinion, reducing these tests to the lowest possible amount is the best solution.
Medicines or any products that affect human’s health must be tested clinically before publishing them to the market or hospital. Since theoretical researches are different from the practical ones and their results are also not enough to ensure the safety of the drug when it is applied to human; therefore, testing on animals is required. Due to the matching of body structure and reaction, we may detect any dangers that theoretical researchs have missed and have proper modifies on the product. After all, the highest priority should be the health of the people who use the products.
Though sacrifices are required, there are people that cannot bear seeing a huge amount of animals suffering and dying in those experiments. It is understandable, for them, these creatures deserve the right to live and die naturally, without being tortured by some chemical substances that human create. There are a few things the scientist can do to relieve this concern: limiting the number of experiments, giving anesthetics, tranquilizers to reduce the painful moment and showing respect to the sacrifices of those animals for science, or in other words, for the sake of humanity.
People should understand that testing on animals is a necessary phase for a product to be used by humans that cannot be banned, meanwhile, the scientist also have to find the most suitable research to minimize the number of animal experiments.
Model 3
The practice of examining medicines before use plays an important role in ensuring users’ safety. However, there are opposite views about whether experimentation on animals for medical purposes are inhuman or not. While I am in favor of the view that animal testing is morally wrong, I would have to support it for the development of medicines.
On the one hand, testing animals for the usability of medicines is unethical as it causes physical pains for innocent animals. We could not understand the tremendous pain and scare feeling animals have to suffer from because few people know that animals are not given anesthetics when tests are conducted. Moreover, how people have behaved towards animals is gradually making humans become increasingly insensitive. For example, when people are really too familiar with news regarding experiments on animals, they would consider such activities to be normal. Hence, men’s sympathy for animals is rapidly fading.
On the other hand, supporters of the use of animals in medical research have their own justifications. Experiments on animals have greatly contributed to saving people from fatal diseases such as Ebola fever or malaria because they will assist medical researchers to find out different types of medicines or remedies for such diseases and assure the safety of those medicines for consumers. Therefore, those who are against testing animals might think differently when their beloved persons need a treatment that has been developed through the use of animal experimentation.
In conclusion, although I disagree with animal testing because this action is cruel, it would be more brutal if the annual numbers of deaths rose strongly due to the lack of drugs which need to be examined on animals’ bodies. Therefore, until equally effective alternatives are developed, I think this practice is still comprehensible.
| Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of resources. To what extent do you agree or disagree? |
There is an opinion saying that protecting wild animals is a waste of time and efforts since they are not necessary anymore in the 21st century. Personally, I disagree with this statement for reasons outlined below.
It is nonsense to say wild animals have no part in the 21st century since they always play an important role in the environment. Whether in the Stone Age, medieval age or modern age, animals, and plants have been living together and forming a balance in life that no humans can make. Plants give off oxygen and foods, while animals help plants grow and multiply. If we don’t protect wild animals well, most of them will go extinct due to overhunting, which will break the balance of nature and lead to many adverse consequences of deforestation, hurricane, and other terrible disasters.
It takes resources to protect wild animals, but their existence will bring other benefits to the nations that preserve/conserve them. Wildlife, zoos and preservation/conservation areas that allow tourists to visit would generate a large amount of income each year to the countries in charge while they can even take pride in themselves for having some of the rarest wild animals in the world, not to mention the environment protection along with it. In addition, most of the cost for protecting the wild animals is covered by various international funds all over the world, so having rare species is more of a blessing than a burden to a country.
In conclusion, wild animals deserve to live freely under protection of humans due to the significance/importance of their existence and the benefits they are bringing. We should do everything we can to protect them for the sake of ourselves and our future generations.
| Some people think that killing animals for food is cruel, but others claim that animals are a necessary part of the diet. What is your opinion? |
In recent years, animal welfare and animal protection have been given higher weight by the general public. Many adopt a view that meat plays an indispensable role in human daily meals. However, to the best of my knowledge, I do believe that butchery is cruel, immoral and people can live healthily without slaughtering and eating animals.
Firstly, it is important that scientific vegetarian diet which has adequate nutrients and substances has been recognized and favored by a large number of people. Nowadays, scientists have proven that many types of plants such as grains, mushroom, and vegetables can provide integral, crucial substances for health and bodily growth similarly as meat does. In fact, for instance, there are many celebrities and famous persons have to choose to be vegetarians in order to improve their health and fight against the capitalization of animals which leads to animal pain and environmental problems.
Secondly, vegetarian diets are vital, beneficial when it comes to human health and well-being. Anecdotal evidence shows that meat-free diets can help to inhibit and even cure some fatal diseases such as cancer. Scientific experiments claim that meat dishes supply nutrients for cancer cells while plant meals do not. Furthermore, albeit intangible, some people recognize that vegetarian lifestyle enhances spiritual life and help them feel better, happier.
In conclusion, not only do meatless diets provide sufficiently necessary nutrients for people’s health, but it also improves human life in a positive way. Therefore, people should reduce meat gradually and replace by vegetables because of its benefits and avoiding cause pain to animals.
| Some people believe that it is wrong to keep animals in zoos, while others think that zoos are both entertaining and ecologically important. Discuss both views. |
People have different views about the right of animals. While there are some good arguments against keeping animals in zoos, many people believe that zoos can be beneficial in some perspectives.
On the one hand, there are some drawbacks towards the trend of keeping animals in zoos. The main drawback of these is that animals can lose their instinct for hunting or fighting, and this may have negative impacts on the animals when they come back to wildlife. Another disadvantage of zoos is that they can go wrong with the original purpose. In fact, there are some organizations who just focus on profit rather than protecting animals. For example, they try to catch rare animals and put them in the cage in order to attract more people and increase their profit. Finally, animals are just like humans, they should have the right to enjoy their freedom.
Despite the negatives mentioned above, zoos still have various benefits. Firstly, they are built to protect endangered species such as panda or rhino from both environmental harm and human activities. They also allow scientists to study about animal characteristic and behaviour in a convenient way which can save a lot of time and money. Secondly, zoos can help to promote the economy of the local area by providing job opportunity and income for local residents. Lastly, zoos are interesting and educational. For example, families with children can enjoy their weekend in the zoo and also can teach their children about wildlife and nature.
In conclusion, it is not wrong to keep animals in zoos but it should be conducted in an appropriate and scientifical way to bring the best benefits for both human and animals.
Essay 2
There is a debate over whether zoos should be maintained or not. While some people argue that zoos are beneficial in terms of entertainment as well as ecology, others believe that keeping animals in zoos violates animal’s right.
On the one hand, people who are in support of the first view advocate that zoos can function as sanctuaries for endangered species which help to maintain the balance of the ecosystem. It is a fact that many rare animals such as tigers, elephants have been on the brink of extinction because of habitat destruction. However, owing to successful captive breeding programs in zoos this hazard has been prevented. Moreover, modern zoos can act as educational centers at which many classes or day trips are conducted to teach people especially children different aspects of zoology. Children have opportunities to see wild animals directly rather than through the books. Scientists also have chances to study animals and their behaviors. In addition to these, zoos bring about economic benefits too. Zoos provide job opportunities for a large number of people and to some extent, make contributions to the revenue of local governments. The money raised can be used for conservation projects.
On the other hand, zoos have some drawbacks. Firstly, zoo animals are kept in an artificial environment with limited place/space which can make them lose their inherently natural instinct. For instance, they cannot have the freedom to hunt for food, therefore, when released into their original habitat, these animals may have trouble living in their own lives. Secondly, some zoos organize animal exhibits with the aim of making money which is unethical. Animals have their all rights and it is wrong for a human to use animals for entertainment and profit.
To sum up, the arguments stated on both views make sense. So it is hard to draw a definite conclusion.
