Some people think that a huge amount of time and money is spent on the
protection of wild animals, and that this money could be better spent on the human
population. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Many people believe that spending large resources to conserve wildlife creators is less important than invest in human communities. In my viewpoint, I disagree with the opinion given and I think that we should allocate our time and money to preserve the wild animals in nature.
The protection of wild animals is a priority. On the one hand, the wildlife extinction results in ecological crisis which affects the biodiversity of nature. For example, the illegal poaching of elephant ivory and rhino horns will decrease the number of creatures soon. On the other hand, protecting wild animals mean that preserving their habitat such as rainforests and wetlands which are not only crucial accommodation for animals but also affect climate change. If human's urbanization destroys these factors, it will insult food production and changes the atmosphere of the environment which impacts directly to global's healthy.
Therefore, human communities are also benefited by conservation wildlife. Firstly, it will promote tourism from all over the world to these areas. For instance, Tram Chim National Park, in Dong Thap province, always attracts not only lots of tourists in Vietnam but also the number of foreigners to experience the glamorous local nature. Secondly, tourism will grow dramatically and creates more jobs for the natives. Therefore, the quality of life of local people will increase rapidly when they have new jobs and the opportunities to make friends with tourists.
In conclusion, I strongly disagree with the view expressed in the statement and I believe that our resources and budgets should spend on wildlife creatures to protect biodiversity.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 171, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the biodiversity of nature. For example, the illegal poaching of elephant ivory a...
^^
Line 3, column 635, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ch impacts directly to globals healthy. Therefore, human communities are also be...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example, for instance, i think, in conclusion, such as, in my view, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 13.1623246493 30% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 24.0651302605 75% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 41.998997996 79% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1408.0 1615.20841683 87% => OK
No of words: 260.0 315.596192385 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.41538461538 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01553427287 4.20363070211 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82335986844 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 176.041082164 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.623076923077 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 436.5 506.74238477 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.2580727896 49.4020404114 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.307692308 106.682146367 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 20.7667163134 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.7692307692 7.06120827912 167% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0837526431923 0.244688304435 34% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0296070111394 0.084324248473 35% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0546103387071 0.0667982634062 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0617269771828 0.151304729494 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.059872739199 0.056905535591 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.0946893788 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.73 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 9.78957915832 82% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.