保育題（conservation）在 Part 3 越來越常出現——通常從 Part 2 的「最喜歡的動物」、「去過的自然景點」延伸過來。考的不是你愛不愛貓——是你能不能討論「物種滅絕為什麼是經濟、生態、倫理三層問題」。
五個常見角度
| 角度 | 題目範例 | |------|----------| | 滅絕原因 | Why are so many species disappearing? | | 動物園倫理 | Are zoos ethical in the modern world? | | 經濟 vs 環境 | Should we prioritise economic growth or wildlife conservation? | | 政府 vs 個人 | Is conservation a government job or a personal one? | | 寵物 | Should keeping wild animals as pets be banned? |
5 題代表題 + Band 7+ 範例
Q1. Why are so many animal species disappearing?
The drivers are surprisingly consistent across continents. Generally speaking, habitat loss is by far the biggest factor — when you cut down a rainforest, the species that depended on it can’t simply relocate. Climate change is accelerating this by shifting temperature zones faster than animals can adapt. There’s also poaching and the illegal wildlife trade, which is highly profitable. So it’s rarely one cause; it’s usually three or four reinforcing each other.
Q2. Are zoos still ethical in the 21st century?
That depends entirely on the type of zoo. Modern conservation-focused zoos that participate in breeding programmes for endangered species — Panda conservation in Chengdu, for example — arguably do real good. On the other hand, traditional roadside zoos that exist purely for entertainment, with cramped enclosures and no scientific role, are much harder to defend. So it’s not zoos in general, it’s the model.
Q3. Should economic development be limited to protect wildlife?
Some limits are unavoidable, but I’d argue framing it as "growth versus nature" is partly misleading. Costa Rica reversed deforestation while growing its economy, largely through ecotourism — protecting forests turned out to be economically rational. That said, in poorer countries with fewer alternatives, asking communities to protect wildlife while losing livelihoods isn’t fair. So the trade-off is real, but it has to be paired with serious financial support from richer countries.
Q4. Is conservation primarily a government responsibility?
Mostly yes, because it requires regulation and funding individuals can’t provide. National parks, anti-poaching units, international treaties — these all need state action. That said, individual choices matter at the margins — meat consumption, palm oil, exotic-pet purchases — and consumer pressure shapes corporate behaviour. So it’s mainly a state job, but the public still has skin in the game.
Q5. Should it be illegal to keep wild animals as pets?
I’d say yes for genuinely wild species — primates, big cats, exotic reptiles. They have welfare needs ordinary owners can’t meet, and trade in them fuels illegal capture. The grey area is animals that have been domesticated for centuries — even though parrots, for instance, are technically wild, they’ve been kept for thousands of years. So a blanket ban would overreach; what’s needed is a clearer line between truly wild and long-domesticated species.
三層結構提醒
Claim — Generally speaking / It depends on / I’d argue
Reason — because / since / the data shows
Example — Costa Rica / Chengdu pandas / palm-oil trade主題詞彙（Band 7 級）
| 詞彙 | 中文 | 範例 chunk | |------|------|------------| | habitat loss | 棲地喪失 | habitat loss drives extinction | | endangered species | 瀕危物種 | protect endangered species | | biodiversity | 生物多樣性 | biodiversity hotspots | | poaching | 盜獵 | poaching of rhinos and elephants | | illegal wildlife trade | 非法野生動物貿易 | crack down on illegal wildlife trade | | ecotourism | 生態旅遊 | ecotourism funds conservation | | breeding programme | 繁殖計畫 | captive breeding programmes | | ecosystem | 生態系統 | ecosystem services we depend on | | keystone species | 關鍵物種 | the loss of keystone species | | deforestation | 森林砍伐 | reverse deforestation trends | | reintroduction | 復育 | the reintroduction of wolves | | wildlife corridor | 生態廊道 | create wildlife corridors | | invasive species | 外來入侵種 | invasive species threaten natives | | conservation funding | 保育經費 | international conservation funding |
台灣考生常見陷阱：「我喜歡動物」
"I love pandas. They are very cute. We should save them." ——這是 Part 1 答案。Part 3 要的是系統分析。
修正：把情感升級為論點：
Before: I love pandas. We should save them.
After: Pandas are an interesting case — they’re what conservationists call a "charismatic" species, meaning they attract funding that benefits the whole forest ecosystem. So saving pandas isn’t just about pandas; arguably the bamboo forests of Sichuan are the real beneficiaries.