With the escalating environmental problems, many types of animals are on the cusp of extinction. There is a widely held belief that only useful animals for human survival should be preserved. Although this view is valid, especially given limited resources, I firmly disagree due to our moral duties and the impracticality of this initiative.
Some people believe that it is animals crucial for human survival that should be protected, justifying their opinion by emphasizing limited funding for conservation programs. The idea of focusing too much on preservation programs is unethical, particularly when millions live below the poverty line and struggle without basic necessities. As such, the importance should be placed on species that play an irreplaceable role in the food chain and medicine. Honeybee populations in the USA can be a compelling example; in the past, their population was under a major threat/was on the brink of extinction. The governing bodies, understanding the importance of this type of animal in the food chain, allocated enormous sums to the preservation programs, which was successful over the medium term.
In my view, however, it is important to attach equal importance to all types of animals. Since the natural world is interconnected in multiple ways, it is practically impossible to tease out whether the particular species is of great significance in biodiversity or not. The immense role of a seemingly unimportant bird – Dodo – for example, was only noticeable after its extinction. This species used to play an indispensable role in the food chain and seed dispersal. Once it vanished, various species struggled to continue living owing to a shortage of food source, and many types of plants could not grow.
Another compelling reason for my stance is our moral onus. What oftentimes causes animal extinction is human activities, such as logging, deforestation, farming, and hunting. Protecting only animals that are useful for human survival may be ethically wrong, and we bear a moral duty to safeguard all animals when possible, regardless of their “usefulness”. Animal species – like Amur leopard or orangutan – have been on the verge of becoming extinct due to habitat loss, driven by massive deforestation and poaching practices.
All points considered, although some individuals are of the opinion that solely important animals should be under protection, the situation is much more complex. I wholeheartedly disagree with this viewpoint, however – as animal species, whether trivial for human survival or not, maintain biodiversity and environmental equilibrium, and we are morally obliged to promote welfare programs.