Cartain concerned parties today would argue that spend more financial resources for protecting animals. In my opinion, despite the unique features to help animals, best way spent to overcome difficulties more meaningful due to the human elements.
Firstly, one of the main reasons why I disagree with the idea to protect wild beast is value of biodiversity. If many people and governments contributed for human life, it will be demonstrated declining issues such as poverty and health problems. In additional, it is not only for individuals, it also can support agriculture and climate change. For instance, Parliament froze a US $13 million plan to extend electrified fencing around two national parks and diverted the money to train 2,000 Community Health Assistants for rural clinics.
An additional reason for my stance is that, spend for society help to enhance economic benefits, including tourism and jobs. Many people will have dream job that influence to environment, while tourism can improve society and popular to other countries. For instance, Rwanda’s gorilla permit scheme has paid for hundreds of local graduates to train as wildlife guides, creating high status jobs while the US $64 million it generates each year funds clinics and classrooms—proof that conservation linked tourism can simultaneously fulfil personal career aspirations and uplift whole communities.
In conclusion, give money better way for people making life easier and improve it. Therefore, I believed that money for society should continue to be an essential goal to governments.