It is considered by some that wildlife should be protected by spending
on them whereas others seem to believe that the human population deserves more.
essay will scrutinize the justifications behind the two contrasting perspectives before the conclusion of why my position lies on the former statement is reached.
On one hand, as most wild
are threatened by human activities, they should be seriously conserved.
do not have the ability to protect themselves from man-made threats, it is our responsibility to compensate them by spending
on their protection.
, the construction of factories poses damage to
' habitats, as well as the ecosystem, contributing to the massive death of susceptible species.
As a result
as abundant forests, should be converted into their new habitats to prevent the extinction of some wild
On the other hand
, the human population is alarmingly increasing over the period, so
are required in order to support their living conditions. To explain, when the population explodes, it means that more accommodations, food supplies, and other
are in need to guarantee their fundamental needs.
, more residential areas are necessarily built to accommodate the projected total of residents, at the expense of natural sites.
should be distributed more to improve the standard of living of humanity
It seems that preposition use may be incorrect here.
In conclusion, taking both aspects into consideration, I am inclined to believe
Change the determiner
that wild animal
those wild animals
It appears that the singular demonstrative that is modifying the plural noun animals. Consider using a plural demonstrative or a singular noun instead.
are dependent on humanity to spend
on their protection rather than spending on humans themselves. If the related authorities could effectively control the destructive human activities which affect
place, there is no need to worry about protecting wildlife as much as in the present.