Many believe that it is important to protect all wild animals, while others think that it is important to protect some, not all of them.
Discuss both views and give your opinion
Protecting endangered species has provoken some controversial arguments. While a party of people advocates the idea that all wild animals should be protected, others are in favor of limiting the protection to some serious ones. Despite a number of noticeable advantages that protecting all wild animals brings about, it is my deep conviction that people should only give serious protection to species that are on the brink of extinction.
Needless to say, protecting all wild animals provides the comprehensive protection. This idea shows that the government does pay attention to all animals, not just some that are endangered, and for them, all animals matter, which serves as a serious threat to poachers. Moreover, giving every creature equal protection helps in informing the citizens about different wild animals. For example, there are some people only know about the animals that are on The Red List because they hear about those animals every single day. Therefore, if the announcement of comprehensive wild management is publicised, people will get the basic information of other wild animals like their pictures or their names.
On the other hand, although comprehensive protection gives the animals a sufficient amount of attention, it takes natural independence from them. To specify, when animals are put under protection, they are supervised closely and their area of natural habitat is limited to avoid poaching. Another factor that support this opinion is practicality. Obviously, there are not enough resources to launch the comprehensive protection campaigns such as trained people, financial support and wild land. Therefore, we should take the animals that are on the brink of extinction as a top-priority.
In conclusion, some public commentators have gone too far in requesting for the protection to all animals without considering the consequences and practicality. I for one will be sticking to the idea that protection should be limited to a number of species.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, moreover, so, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 7.30460921844 164% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 8.3376753507 228% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1686.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 310.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.43870967742 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00773197159 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.535483870968 0.561755894193 95% => OK
syllable_count: 531.9 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.7262084544 49.4020404114 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.4 106.682146367 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6666666667 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06120827912 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.347038671233 0.244688304435 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.125053113637 0.084324248473 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0751035118213 0.0667982634062 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.219410947109 0.151304729494 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0669701459884 0.056905535591 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.0946893788 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 78.4519038076 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.