The question of whether we should combat the extinction of wild animals or solely protect a small proportion of animals that are advantageous to human beings is a subject of intense debate. While protecting animals directly useful for us contains some merits, I wholeheartedly believe that individuals should put more effort into protecting wild animals, especially ones on the edge of extinction.
Some advocate for only allowing resources to maintain useful animals by the physical and mental well-being it offers. Regarding the former, some animals serve as an indispensable source of food, which is crucial for the physical development of human beings. For example, chickens and pigs are always on the daily diet of many people, providing a rich source of protein, vitamins, and other nutrients. Concerning the latter, animals can be a source of happiness and boon companionship. To illustrate, raising a cat, a hallmark of modern society, can help individuals retreat after encountering hardships and stresses in school or working settings.
Despite the abovementioned arguments, I firmly subscribe to the idea of protecting all creatures inhabiting our planet. Each creature, regardless of its immediate utility, holds significance in maintaining the intricate balance of our ecosystems. Every animal is a part of the complex food chains that are paramount to our existence. Removing one species can have far-reaching consequences and disrupt the delicate equilibrium that sustains life on Earth. For example, the preservation of a predator species like the grey wolf indirectly benefits the environment by controlling the population of herbivores, such as deer, and preventing overgrazing in ecosystems.
In conclusion, while many people argue that we just need to protect animals that are directly beneficial to us, I maintain that every creature has its significance and we should take responsibility to protect them as a whole.