Some people think that human needs for farmland,housing and industry are more important than saving land for endangered animals. Do you agree or disagree with this point of view. Use specific reasons and examples to support your choice?
The issue of giving priority for human's demands on farmland, housing and industry or paying more attention to living space of endangered animals
(be) debatable. Although arguments for and against it are varied and reasonable, I would
(contend) that the needs of human beings in ensuring their existence should
(consider) as the most important issue in the society.To begin with, as reported on media communications, there
(be) thousands of people all over the world
(face) with homelessness and poverty. Their humble expectation is to have a shelter to stay in and some food to eat, but it
(be) far too easy to get there. For example, in Vietnam, especially the Centre of Vietnam where attacked by many severe natural disasters, people's life here are unstable as after each flood or storm, their houses and their farms
(seriously damage). Therefore, the governments should
(make) a great effort in discovering new areas for those so that their life can be improved and from there, they can contribute to the development of the society.It may
(argue) that we should save lands for rare animals to maintain the balance of eco-system. They
(stress) that it is important to the sustainable development of environment. However, this view
(soon flaw) as the fact that if there are not enough lands for human's need, they have to resort to the forest land by doing mass deforestation to have more space for farming, housing and industry. As a result, the environment could
(more severely affect).In conclusion, I strongly
(hold) to the view that human's demand for their living in terms of lands should
(give) more priority than keep space for endangered species based on the evidences mentioned in the essay.