Governments spend a lot of money on wildlife protection instead of starting new projects. Is this a positive or a negative trend. Give our opinion and examples from your experience.
Nowadays, funding for wildlife protection has become a global trend. Many developed countries are allocating a large number of amount annually on projects related to wildlife. however, like some other researchers, I agree with the notion that a number of other issues need to take in account instead of spending such a large sum in animal protection. this essay will discuss how national focus only on wildlife safety can cause negative impacts.
First of all, if most of the national funds collected from citizen's taxation is dedicated to wildlife protection, then automatically environmental issues, like pollution, deforestation would not get as much attention as required to combat global warming. In other words, instead of spending on one issue, the government should be focusing on new projects that can elevate the national risks of natural disasters. For instance, a recent study by UNDP has found that a couple of EU countries has built zoo and animal shelters that cost 300 million euro per year for the maintenance, however, if half of this amount could help on introducing eco-friendly vehicle, then those countries could lead as countries with zero carbon footprint on the transportation sector.
Secondly, by concentrating on wildlife instead of the country's employment cycle, political leaders are guiding the nation to build a depressed generation. To elaborate, most of the countries need to focus on the future generation by hosting capacity development programs to ensure they can have a sustainable career in this ever-changing industry. For instance, an article in The Guardian has reported that countries like USA, Germany are going forward far rapidly than other countries because of the federal investment on young talents. The report also compared other investment where it was clear that economically prospering countries have limited their investment in wildlife, and diverted their focus on youth development.
To conclude, spending public's tax on wildlife protection can cause more setbacks than positive outcomes, as innovative projects on environmental threats and skill development can be delayed if wildlife protection receives more support from government level comparing to the other two sectors mentioned.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 110, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...Many developed countries are allocating a large number of amount annually on projects related to ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 177, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...nually on projects related to wildlife. however, like some other researchers, I agree w...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 352, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: This
... such a large sum in animal protection. this essay will discuss how national focus o...
^^^^
Line 5, column 764, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...footprint on the transportation sector. Secondly, by concentrating on wildlife i...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, for instance, first of all, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 10.4138276553 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 41.998997996 119% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 8.3376753507 288% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1916.0 1615.20841683 119% => OK
No of words: 345.0 315.596192385 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.55362318841 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3097767484 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97732098432 2.80592935109 106% => OK
Unique words: 206.0 176.041082164 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.597101449275 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 591.3 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 28.0 20.2975951904 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 79.3193264946 49.4020404114 161% => OK
Chars per sentence: 159.666666667 106.682146367 150% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.75 20.7667163134 138% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06120827912 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.01903807615 80% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.148660970394 0.244688304435 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0583212359853 0.084324248473 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0530787448821 0.0667982634062 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.100561867519 0.151304729494 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0468363594957 0.056905535591 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.1 13.0946893788 146% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.6 50.2224549098 69% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.5 12.4159519038 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.83 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 78.4519038076 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.1190380762 130% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.7795591182 148% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.