🧑🎤 Talk Boosters – Topic 32: 🗣️ Is It Right to Kill Wild Animals That Enter Human Areas?
👣 Talk Boosters – Topic 32
🗣️ Is It Right to Kill Wild Animals That Enter Human Areas?
🧑🏫 I. Instructions for Teachers
i. General Instructions:
Introduce the topic and ask learners to speak continuously for 3–5 minutes.
Encourage them to express personal opinions, share real-life examples, and discuss the conflict between human safety and wildlife conservation.
Let them explore ethical, environmental, and practical angles of dealing with wild animals like elephants, leopards, boars, etc., entering human spaces.
While the learner is speaking, note grammar or vocabulary errors.
After the speech, provide corrections and model improved sentence structures.
Use the follow-up questions below to extend the discussion for 30–40 minutes.
ii. Topic Instructions:
Ask students to share their views on whether it is right to kill wild animals that enter human living areas.
They can speak about:
-
Why wild animals are coming into human areas (deforestation, food shortage, urban expansion)
-
Real incidents in Kerala or India involving animal attacks
-
People's fear and anger vs. the rights of animals
-
Forest department response and protection laws
-
Alternative methods like tranquilization and relocation
-
Role of local communities in prevention
-
Impact of killing on the ecosystem and future generations
-
Whether human encroachment is to blame
Encourage the use of opinion phrases like:
👉 I believe, In my opinion, We must consider, It's a difficult issue because, Some people argue that...
💬 Useful Verbs & Phrases:
👉 protect, relocate, encroach, attack, preserve, provoke, tranquilize, rescue, conserve, habitat loss, human-wildlife conflict, ecosystem, forest boundaries
🗣️ Example Starter:
"In my opinion, it is not always right to kill wild animals that enter human areas. Most of the time, they come because we have destroyed their homes. Instead of killing them, we should look for peaceful ways to relocate them and protect both people and animals. Killing should only be the last option when there is a direct and unavoidable threat."
🌍 II. Follow-up Questions to Extend the Topic:
1️⃣ Why are wild animals entering towns and villages more frequently now?
2️⃣ Do you think killing them is a solution or just a reaction?
3️⃣ What alternatives can the forest department use?
4️⃣ Have there been any incidents near your area involving wild animals?
5️⃣ Is it fair to blame animals for entering places that used to be forests?
6️⃣ Should humans avoid living too close to forests?
7️⃣ What role does garbage and food waste play in attracting animals?
8️⃣ What steps can the government take to reduce these conflicts?
9️⃣ Should schools educate children about wildlife safety?
🔟 Can technology like GPS collars or drones help track wild animals?
1️⃣1️⃣ Do forest rangers have enough training and tools?
1️⃣2️⃣ Should there be stricter laws against illegal encroachment into forest land?
1️⃣3️⃣ What are the emotional effects on people after a wild animal attack?
1️⃣4️⃣ Should we kill one animal to save many human lives?
1️⃣5️⃣ How does the media influence public opinion in such cases?
1️⃣6️⃣ Do you think we can create a peaceful co-existence between humans and wild animals?
1️⃣7️⃣ What lessons can we learn from tribal or forest-dwelling communities?
1️⃣8️⃣ Can reforestation reduce this issue?
1️⃣9️⃣ What message should we give children about respecting wildlife?
2️⃣0️⃣ Is this more of a human mistake than an animal problem?
Today, we are discussing a topic that has become increasingly relevant in many parts of India, especially in Kerala: “Is It Right to Kill Wild Animals That Enter Human Areas?”
SAMPLE 1: Supporting the Killing of Wild Animals for Public Safety
With rapid urbanisation and expanding residential zones, the boundaries between forests and human settlements are vanishing. As a result, more and more wild animals such as leopards, elephants, wild boars, and even tigers are straying into human habitats. These visits often end in property damage, injury, and, in some cases, loss of human life. Understandably, there is a growing demand for stronger actions against such intrusions, including the killing of dangerous wild animals.
Public safety must come first. In rural and forest-adjacent areas, villagers live in constant fear. Children are unable to walk to school without risk, and farmers are afraid to tend to their crops due to frequent boar or elephant attacks. Families have suffered losses—both economic and emotional—because of such encounters. In such scenarios, many argue that killing aggressive animals is a justified act of self-defense and community protection.
Efforts like using firecrackers, noise deterrents, and forest fencing often fail to prevent wild animals from returning. Forest officials are under-equipped, and tranquilization is not always timely or feasible. In emergencies, decisions must be made in seconds, and waiting for a tranquilizer team could cost human lives.
Furthermore, killing wild animals in extreme cases is not necessarily an act of cruelty—it is often a measure taken after repeated warnings and failed attempts to relocate the animal. Countries around the world have laws that permit euthanising wild animals that pose a persistent threat to human life. We need to consider whether our empathy for animals should outweigh our duty to protect humans.
Diseases are another concern. Wild animals can carry parasites and viruses that spread to domestic animals and humans. The recent rise in zoonotic diseases should serve as a warning about unchecked interactions between humans and wildlife.
In conclusion, while no one wishes harm upon any creature, the harsh reality is that in situations where repeated threats occur, taking a strong stance—including killing as a last resort—might be necessary for public safety. This is not a choice made lightly, but one made to preserve the balance between survival and compassion.
SAMPLE 2: Opposing the Killing of Wild Animals – A Conservationist's Perspective
On the other hand, many conservationists and animal lovers argue strongly that killing wild animals is not only unethical but also ineffective and shortsighted. Wild animals are not intruders by choice—they are forced into human areas due to deforestation, habitat destruction, and shrinking food sources.
Before humans expanded into forests, these animals roamed freely without causing any harm. It is our actions—cutting trees, building roads, and polluting water sources—that have pushed them into unfamiliar and often dangerous human environments. To now punish them for merely trying to survive is deeply unjust.
There are alternatives. Better forest management, reforestation efforts, creating buffer zones, and investing in modern wildlife tracking technology can go a long way in preventing conflict. Moreover, community awareness and training programs can prepare villagers and townspeople to deal with animal encounters safely, reducing panic-driven responses.
Studies also suggest that killing wild animals creates ecological imbalances. For example, eliminating a predator like a leopard can lead to an overpopulation of monkeys or deer, which then affect crops and human life in other ways. Nature is a delicate web, and each species plays a role. Destroying one element can have far-reaching consequences.
From an ethical standpoint, life is sacred. Animals, too, have families, feelings, and instincts. They don’t act out of malice—they act out of fear, hunger, or confusion. Killing them for our convenience sends the wrong message to future generations about compassion, coexistence, and respect for life.
Even practically, the "vacuum effect" seen in stray dog removal applies here as well. Removing one animal from an area may only make room for another. The real solution lies in addressing root causes, not symptoms.
Legal frameworks like the Wildlife Protection Act exist for a reason. They remind us that these animals are part of our natural heritage and deserve protection. We must pressure governments to strengthen forest departments, improve response mechanisms, and invest in long-term wildlife conservation.
In conclusion, killing wild animals that enter human areas is not a real solution—it is a reaction to a deeper problem. What we need is a long-term vision that combines human safety with wildlife respect. Education, policy reform, and empathy can help us build a world where both people and animals can live without fear.
Thank you for listening to both perspectives. Let us reflect not just on what is easy, but on what is right.
”