The word "Nowadays" is not very great. It is a word people don't use very often. It might be better to say, "In modern times," or "In the 21st century,"...
But actually, it is bad for me to tell you not to write "nowadays." People do use it. I guess I just don't like it! :-)
It seems that ur not the only one that don't like this word. Recently I wrote an essay with the word "nowadays" in the introduction and my teacher said it was a boring word. So I think it might be better not to use it^^
In modern times/in today's society, ecologist always argues that urbanization takes too many lands that animals inhabit, which causes the extinctions of wild animals. So more and more dispute regarding the importance of land developments for humans occurs. Some people assert that human needs should be the top priority, while others disapprove. I myself believe that both two viewpoints are right to some extent.
First of all, I agree that human needs for land, housing and industry are essential in human substance. With the increment of population and the restrictions of natural resources, people need more lands for housing, farming and working. It is undeniable that ousting wild animals from their inhabitants seems to be the only method to satisfy our pursuit of lands for development. Although many wild animals have to confront extinction as a result of this landing expansion, it is acceptable from the prospective of evolution. Nature undoubtedly picks the stronger creature as the winner in the land conquest and leaves the weaker with no choice but to leave and to disappear. (The word "so" shouldn't be used at the beginning of the sentence in an academic essay. As in this para, ur in favor of humans' needs for land, the arguments should support the idea strongly. I've just rewritten the sentences to make the argument more persuasive and stick to the idea)
However, I do not think people should take over the lands not for primary living requirement, but for subsidiary entertainment purpose. For example, some sports clubs purchase land for
building golf activities, hotels, or other commercial purposes (u can't say they build activities). To achieve this, people disturb animals' life, oust them from their natural habitat and more seriously, put their lives in danger. People should consider the fact that the extinction of one kind of animal would have great impacts on the food chain and might lead to other animals' disappearance. They should know the long-term effects/underlying effects/potential for harm could be unimaginably enormous.
I also believe that sometimes land development and protection of endangered animals are not contradicted with each other. It is entirely possible that people can build more national parks or enclosures in some areas for animal protection. In addition, this implementation would have positive effects on scientists who observe and protect (assist should only be used with the meaning of helping sb to do sth, usu at work)
the wild animals for their survival on earth.
In conclusion, my opinion is that although humans' need for lands for housing and industry is an essential part of life, we can make some efforts to reduce the quantity of unnecessary land covering in order to protect endangered animals. What's more, as a stronger conqueror on earth, people should have the responsibility to balance human development and wild life protection.