Some people say that too much attention and too many resources are given in the protection of wild animals and birds.
Do you agree and disagree about this option?
The protection of wildlife has become a frequent subject of debate with strong argument for and against. I totally agree with the view that humans should allocate more resources for wildlife conservation.
Firstly, humankind will probably face the risks of health when a number of wild animals are on the verge of extiontion. This is because today, various species of animals are being studied and researched upon to find remedies to deadly diseases like cancers, and a huge number of animal species are used to benefit humans in different ways. If wildlife is not preserved, there would soon be a time when human race would be in great danger.
Secondly, if human fail to protect wild aniamls, economic damages to many fields are inevitability. It is true that biodiversity has brought considerable economic values. If there was a disapperance of a wild animal, this would lead to dead threats to others species because of the interdependency. Therefore, the national economy would probably suffer heavy losses in which the exploitation of wild animals benefit considerably. For example, some fishes that are prey to whales would disappear, resulting in the risk of decline in the number of whales. As a result, the fishing industry contributing to national budget would have an adverse impact.
Finally, animal conservations play a vital role for humans in preventing a threat to biodiversity. By protecting wildlife, people can maintain biological resources such as diversity in genes, species and ecosystems. Also, this is the responsibility for the young generation because wild aminals are cultural values.
In conclusion, I complete concur with the idea that the conservation of wild animals is necessary for mankind because of aforementioned reasons.