Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of resources. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some people argue that it is needless to conserve wildlife, as it is a wasteful use of resources. I disagree with this notion as I believe that this idea is selfish and unethical. At the same time, its protection is entirely necessary.
To begin with, it is preposterous to argue over having no place for wild animals in this century. In the past, humans and wildlife have been thriving together. So why suddenly, humans have now forgotten, without any compelling reason, except to fulfil their own greed, that other stakeholders must be wiped out? For instance, poaching, trophy hunting has been on the rise, bluntly disregarding the social beings that live in such areas. Furthermore, it is savagely amoral to forcefully destroy the habitats of the fauna, keeping personal interests over common welfare. Thus, it is a parasitic behaviour to overtake, which was once a commonplace.
On the other hand, I think that safeguarding these living beings is not only entirely necessary, but also a good use of resources. Firstly, they are an inspiration to decrease our environmental impact as they can invoke feelings of sympathy and compassion, causing people to become conscious of the damaging effects to their lifestyles. Secondly, they help to strike an ecological balance. For instance, the predators at the top of the food chain, hunt the prey animals, which in turn check their population and at the same time preserve the essential plant life. In this way, a balance is maintained in the food chain. thus, saving these entities not only keep us in check of our living styles, but also helps to maintain ecological balance.
In conclusion, I believe that it is acutely important to save the fauna and it is unprincipled to ever consider them as wasteful for us.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 621, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Thus
...alance is maintained in the food chain. thus, saving these entities not only keep us...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, furthermore, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, thus, for instance, i think, in conclusion, to begin with, 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: 2.0 7.85571142285 25% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 24.0651302605 145% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1481.0 1615.20841683 92% => OK
No of words: 296.0 315.596192385 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.00337837838 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81845860562 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 176.041082164 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.60472972973 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 472.5 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 5.43587174349 184% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.7819526175 49.4020404114 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.5625 106.682146367 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5 20.7667163134 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5625 7.06120827912 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.13047633678 0.244688304435 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0389658811156 0.084324248473 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0608348729839 0.0667982634062 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0780028644873 0.151304729494 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0438717925195 0.056905535591 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.0946893788 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 50.2224549098 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.96 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.