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?
Sample Response
To begin with, the dynamics which have contributed to the ailing health of the wildlife are majorly relevant to human actions. The usages of certain environmental deterrents like chlorofluorocarbons, DDT, and other hazardous pollutants have been major culprits in this regard. That being said, a lot of damage is already done, which to a larger extent is irrecuperable. The need of the hour, however, is to preserve and fortify the wildlife. For instance, the species of Asiatic Lion, which are only found in parts of India now, were deemed ‘Endangered’ mainly because of habitat loss owing to climate change, grazing, growing agricultural demands, etc. Therefore, it is of prime essence that the government and authorities should indeed focus on the judicial methods to safeguard the wildlife.
The government should invest in the rehabilitation of the natural environment, as in the purview of substantial development it is very crucial that nature and its resources are intact and unblemished. It could appear as an arduous deal to spend money and capital on wildlife. Conversely, it could promote and foster economical status as India largely attracts the international footfall for its flora and fauna, and hence it rather would be a prudential decision to strengthen the tourism baseline and capital bolstering.
Conclusively, it is in the best of human interest that the government spends and invests in the fortification of conservation of wildlife and is not at all an extravagance. (301 words)
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Use accurate noun Original: the dynamics which have contributed Suggested revision: the factors that have contributed Why it matters: “Factors” accurately names the causes being discussed, whereas “dynamics” is too vague here.
- 2. Use precise expression Original: the ailing health of the wildlife Suggested revision: the decline of wildlife Why it matters: The original phrase awkwardly applies human health language to wildlife as a whole.
- 3. Express cause clearly Original: majorly relevant to human actions Suggested revision: largely attributable to human actions Why it matters: “Attributable to” clearly expresses that human actions are the principal cause.
- 4. Use uncountable noun Original: usages Suggested revision: use Why it matters: “Use” is uncountable when referring generally to the employment of these substances.
- 5. Name substances accurately Original: deterrents Suggested revision: pollutants Why it matters: A deterrent discourages an action, while the listed substances are being described as pollutants.
- 6. Use formal cause term Original: culprits Suggested revision: causes Why it matters: “Major causes” states the causal relationship more directly in formal writing.
- 7. Use present perfect Original: a lot of damage is already done Suggested revision: a lot of damage has already been done Why it matters: The present perfect connects past environmental damage with its current consequences.
- 8. Correct fixed phrase Original: larger Suggested revision: large Why it matters: The standard degree phrase is “to a large extent.”
- 9. Use natural adjective Original: irrecuperable Suggested revision: irreversible Why it matters: “Irreversible” is the conventional adjective for environmental damage that cannot be undone.
- 10. Use correct collocation Original: fortify the wildlife Suggested revision: protect wildlife Why it matters: Wildlife is protected or preserved, while “fortify” normally means physically strengthening a place or structure.
- 11. Correct species reference Original: the species of Asiatic Lion Suggested revision: the Asiatic lion Why it matters: The animal name can be used directly here and should not be capitalized as a common species name.
- 12. Match singular subject Original: which are only found Suggested revision: which is now found only Why it matters: The relative clause refers to the singular Asiatic lion and therefore requires “is.”
Suggested Rewrites
- the dynamics which have contributed the factors that have contributed
- the ailing health of the wildlife the decline of wildlife
- majorly relevant to human actions largely attributable to human actions
- usages use
- deterrents pollutants
- culprits causes
Why this response received Band 6.5
The response gives a clear defence of wildlife spending and supports it with both environmental responsibility and economic benefit, while maintaining a broadly logical progression. Its main limitation is limited engagement with the proposed alternative of spending on people, compounded by a slightly under-length response and frequently imprecise word choices. Directly compare the competing priorities and develop that comparison in accurate, natural language.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
A clear disagreement is supported by two relevant reasons, but the alternative case for human spending is barely examined and development is constrained by the short length.
Compare wildlife protection directly with specific human needs and explain why the proposed spending remains justified despite that opportunity cost.
Coherence and Cohesion
The two main reasons follow a sensible sequence and paragraphing is clear, although the missing introduction and some mechanical transitions weaken overall progression.
Open with a concise position and use topic sentences that show how each paragraph advances the comparison required by the question.
Lexical Resource
There is a wide attempted range, but frequent inaccurate collocations and word choices make several claims imprecise or unnatural.
Replace inflated expressions such as judicial methods, economical status, and capital bolstering with precise topic-specific vocabulary.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
Complex sentences are attempted successfully enough to keep meaning clear, though article, agreement, tense, and clause-control errors recur.
Use more controlled sentence structures and check agreement and article choices, especially when sentences contain several linked clauses.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
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?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.