Some people believe that all wild animals should be protected. Others say that few wild animals should be protected instead. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Sample Response
Every year a number of wild animals are being extinct and the increasing number of endangered species worldwide is an alarming issue for us. Some people are in the opinion that we should try to save all the wild animals while others believe that we should emphasise on saving some selective wild animals.
First of all, wild animals are part of our eco-system and they have as much share as we have on this Earth. Due to exploit and overuse of natural resources by humans, many such wild animals are getting wiped out. Since we, human, are the main reasons their existence are in danger, it is our obligation to protect them. While planning and executing our steps to save wild animals, we should never select some wild animals while letting others die. In fact, it is quite unclear what would be the determining factors for our biassed selection? Many people, in this case, would argue that we should focus on saving wild animals which are fewer in numbers and have greater chances of extinction like Royal Bengal Tigers and Pandas. However, I disagree. If we take proper steps to save wild animals, that would include any wild animal found around us. For instance, if we can ensure a natural inhabitation of all wild animals and prohibit any actions that might threaten them, would actually save all the wild animals.
When saving some selective wild animals, many argue that geological garden could a safe place for them. In fact, the reality is quite contrary. We should not put wild animals in cages and should let them freely live in their natural living place. International organisations like UN, UNESCO, WWF, Wildlife Alliance etc. sometimes work on saving endangered animals but that does not restrict their activities for saving those wild animals only. They have broader plans and several initiatives for saving all the wildlife animals.
Finally, our won activities like logging trees, increasing use of cars, expanding cities, luxury, rampant hunting of animals etc. are the main threats to every wild animal in the world and the time has come for us to step forward and stop such activities. Saving every wild animal is a dire need not only to maintain the natural balance but also for our own well-being.
In conclusion, we should save every wild animal that is still present in the world. Selecting some wild animals for saving is an idea we should discard as it would bring more devastating effects than positive ones.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Fix extinction phrase Original: are being extinct Suggested revision: are becoming extinct Why it matters: Extinct is a state, so becoming rather than the passive being expresses the ongoing change.
- 2. Fix preposition phrase Original: are in the opinion that Suggested revision: are of the opinion that Why it matters: Of the opinion is the standard construction for expressing a view.
- 3. Remove incorrect preposition Original: emphasise on saving Suggested revision: emphasise saving Why it matters: Emphasise takes a direct object and does not require on.
- 4. Use correct adjective Original: some selective wild animals Suggested revision: selected wild animals Why it matters: Selected means deliberately chosen, whereas selective describes someone or something that chooses carefully.
- 5. Fix spelling Original: eco-system Suggested revision: ecosystem Why it matters: Ecosystem is written as one unhyphenated word.
- 6. Clarify equal status Original: as much share as we have Suggested revision: as much right to exist as humans do Why it matters: The revision expresses the intended equality in a natural comparison.
- 7. Use noun form Original: Due to exploit and overuse Suggested revision: Due to the exploitation and overuse Why it matters: Due to must be followed by noun phrases, so exploit needs the noun exploitation.
- 8. Fix number and agreement Original: we, human, are the main reasons their existence are in danger Suggested revision: we humans are the main reason their existence is in danger Why it matters: The revision corrects the appositive noun, singular complement, and subject-verb agreement.
- 9. Use natural collocation Original: planning and executing our steps Suggested revision: planning and implementing measures Why it matters: Measures are implemented, whereas steps are not naturally executed in this context.
- 10. Fix relative phrase Original: which are fewer in numbers Suggested revision: that are fewer in number Why it matters: Number is singular in the fixed expression fewer in number, and that clearly identifies the animals concerned.
- 11. Use risk collocation Original: have greater chances of extinction Suggested revision: face a greater risk of extinction Why it matters: Species face a risk of extinction rather than have chances of it.
- 12. Use correct habitat term Original: a natural inhabitation of all wild animals Suggested revision: natural habitats for all wild animals Why it matters: Habitat names an animal's living environment, while inhabitation names the act of occupying a place.
Suggested Rewrites
- are being extinct are becoming extinct
- are in the opinion that are of the opinion that
- emphasise on saving emphasise saving
- some selective wild animals selected wild animals
- eco-system ecosystem
- as much share as we have as much right to exist as humans do
Why this response received Band 6.5
The essay maintains a clear, principled position and develops relevant arguments about ecological responsibility, habitat protection and human-caused threats, while acknowledging prioritisation of endangered species and captive protection. Its main limitation is that the opposing view is introduced mostly to be dismissed, without examining practical reasons for selective conservation such as limited funding; prioritise developing that rationale fairly before rebutting it, while correcting frequent collocational and grammatical errors that blur otherwise sound ideas.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Detailed feedback by IELTS writing criterion after the annotated essay.
Task Response
The protect-all position is clear and supported through ecological duty, habitat preservation and human responsibility, while the selective view is addressed but not developed with equal depth.
Explain the strongest practical case for prioritising a few species, such as scarce funding or urgent extinction risk, before showing why broad habitat protection remains preferable.
Coherence and Cohesion
The essay progresses logically from the issue to prioritisation, captive protection, human threats and a firm conclusion, with generally clear paragraphing and signposting.
Separate the selective-conservation case from its rebuttal and reduce repeated uses of wild animals and saving so that each paragraph’s argumentative role is clearer.
Lexical Resource
There is sufficient range for conservation arguments, but frequent inaccurate forms and collocations such as being extinct, selective wild animals, natural inhabitation and geological garden reduce precision.
Use becoming extinct, selected species, natural habitat, zoological garden, wildlife conservation and human activities consistently.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A mix of simple and complex structures conveys the argument, but recurring errors in agreement, articles, conditionals and clause completion remain noticeable.
Correct structures such as species are becoming extinct, we humans are the main reason, a zoo could be safe, and protecting habitats would save many species.
Use this task for your next draft
Feedback is more useful when you actively apply it in a draft, rather than only recognising improvements on the page.
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.
The question will be loaded automatically.