You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.
Write about the following topic:
It often said that governments spend too much money to protect wildlife, while there are other problems that are more important.
Do you agree or disagree?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge and experiences.
You should write at least 250 words.
Get your personalised IELTS Essay Feedback from a former examiner
Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score
Sample Essay 1
The debate over whether governments spend too much money to protect wildlife, amidst other pressing issues, is a topic of contention. While some argue that resources could be better allocated, the protection of wildlife is imperative for ecological balance and future generations. This essay contends that while other problems warrant attention, safeguarding wildlife should not be compromised, as it is integral to our survival and environmental health.
Firstly, the argument that "governments spend too much money to protect wildlife" overlooks the broader benefits of conservation efforts. These initiatives not only preserve species from extinction but also maintain biodiversity, which is crucial for ecosystem resilience and human well-being. Healthy forests and oceans, acting as vital carbon sinks, play a pivotal role in mitigating the impacts of climate change, underscoring the interconnectedness of all life forms. Additionally, ecotourism, which relies on well-preserved natural habitats, significantly contributes to national economies, demonstrating that investment in wildlife protection can yield substantial returns. This investment also fosters global collaboration in conservation, enhancing diplomatic relations.
Secondly, addressing other societal issues does not necessitate reducing funds for wildlife protection. Innovative solutions and efficient budgeting can allow for balanced spending across sectors, ensuring that vital environmental programs are not compromised. For example, integrating green infrastructure in urban planning not only benefits both residents and urban wildlife but also enhances the aesthetic and health benefits of living spaces. This approach illustrates that societal development and environmental conservation can be mutually supportive, fostering a more sustainable and inclusive model of development. The emphasis should be on creating a sustainable model of development that recognizes the intrinsic value of nature and leverages technology to minimize human impact on the environment.
In conclusion, while it is crucial to address a myriad of challenges facing our societies, the argument that governments spend too much money to protect wildlife is shortsighted. Conservation efforts are not merely an ethical obligation but a strategic investment in our planet's health and, by extension, our own survival. Thus, it is imperative that we continue to allocate resources towards protecting our natural world, ensuring a harmonious balance between human progress and environmental stewardship.
Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score
Sample Essay 2
The prevailing discourse that posits "governments spend too much money to protect wildlife" often fails to consider the multifaceted benefits of such investments. This essay aims to argue against the reduction of wildlife protection funding, positing that these expenditures are not only necessary but also beneficial for economic development, environmental sustainability, and societal well-being.
At the heart of the debate is the misconception that financial allocations toward wildlife conservation detract from addressing other critical societal issues. However, this perspective overlooks the intrinsic and extrinsic values that wildlife preservation brings. For instance, ecosystems play crucial roles in regulating the climate, purifying water, and pollinating crops—services that are invaluable to human existence and cannot be replicated at any cost. Moreover, the protection of natural habitats encourages biodiversity, which is essential for ecological resilience and the discovery of pharmaceuticals that can lead to groundbreaking medical advancements.
Furthermore, the investment in wildlife conservation often stimulates economic growth through ecotourism, creating jobs, and fostering community development, especially in rural areas. This not only helps in preserving the environment but also in generating sustainable income sources for local populations. Additionally, these efforts can enhance global reputation, attracting international aid and investment. For example, countries renowned for their wildlife reserves and national parks, such as Costa Rica and Kenya, have witnessed significant economic benefits from prioritizing conservation.
To argue that "governments spend too much money to protect wildlife" is to ignore the symbiotic relationship between humans and nature. It is imperative to recognize that safeguarding the planet’s biodiversity is not an optional expense but a critical investment in our collective future. Conservation funding should be viewed not as a drain on resources but as a pivotal strategy for sustainable development, underpinning economic, environmental, and social progress.
In conclusion, the argument against the financial commitment to wildlife protection is short-sighted and overlooks the comprehensive benefits of such efforts. The preservation of natural habitats and wildlife is a testament to our responsibility as stewards of the earth, ensuring a livable world for future generations. It is, therefore, essential that governments continue to allocate resources towards these initiatives, recognizing their profound impact on our planet and humanity.
Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score
Sample Essay 3
It is often argued that countries would allocate an enormous budget to guard wildlife while there would be different complications that appear more valuable. I completely agree with this statement because I believe that employment and subsidisation to ensure citizens' fundamental rights demand much more government funds compared to that of wildlife. The following paragraphs will establish the idea in detail with proper logic and examples.
The first and most compelling reason for holding to my view is that during the Coronavirus era, a number of workers had lost their jobs. In other words, they are currently left without a monthly salary that would allow them to afford loans or fulfil their basic needs. The reason behind this is the worldwide financial crises caused by the quarantine and the companies’ closure for human’s safety. To clarify, a study conducted by the Ministry of Labour in Lebanon revealed that 65% of employees were fired after January 2020, which left them incapable of purchasing goods. Thus, a significant disbursement of cash to needy people would sound more relevant than caring for animals.
In addition, another effective use of a government fund is to reduce the day-to-day expenditure of citizens’ essentials. This reduction could be in terms of providing subsidies on healthcare and education to produce a healthy and skilled workforce. In fact, a robust health and education system has a trickle-down effect on the overall happiness, as healthy and educated people stay active, earn money, can meet the basic needs, and eventually live a decent happy life. For instance, Canadian citizens’ happiness index rose from 55% to 86% over the last few decades, and all this is due to the government funded education and healthcare services.
In conclusion, though governments tend to spend their major share of resources to protect wildlife, this essay has established convincingly that prioritising public funds for helping people to gain the necessary education and financial security is much more rewarding on the long run.
Get your personalised IELTS Essay Feedback from a former examiner
Download IELTS eBooks, get everything you need to achieve a high band score