People have different perspectives regarding whether to sprawl to the countryside with building new houses or to protect it from overwhelming urbanization. I firmly believe that protecting the countryside is more beneficial for several valid reasons.
Although increasing demand for new houses is an arising problem due to the explosion of population and it can be considered a major hurdle. Protecting the countryside seems to be more advantageous. Firstly, from an environmental perspective. The countryside sometime provides a natural habitat for animals, especially in forests and green fields. Protecting it will promote biodiversity and maintain a balanced eco-system. Moreover, this harmony can be corrupted by immense deforestation and logging which are caused by urban sprawl and thus it might push some species toward extinction. Secondly, countryside can offer great recreational activity. For example, walking and camping along with maintaining mental well-being allowing people to escape from the fast pace of modern life, reducing stress and daily pressure. Additionally, countryside sometimes is preserved as a cultural/historical place which should be protected as a part of country legacy. Once these historical sites are lost, they can never be restored again.
However, there is an increasing concern about population growth in urban cities. These issues can be tackled by adopting new approaches. For instance, governments can mitigate this issue by encouraging people to start building houses in an up-rising way instead of horizontal ones. This can serve as an available and easy solution, especially in crowded parts of the city. Another possible solution is regenerating derelict buildings in order to convert them into new houses.
In conclusion, admittedly, proponents of the idea of utilizing countryside have some worthy concerns. However, those issues can be possibly tackled and thus I stand by the opinion that countryside should be protected for environmental, recreational and cultural reasons.