Nowadays, a large number of animals are under threat of extinction; therefore, some individuals contend that we should channel our funds and efforts toward protecting animals which are useful to society. However, I largely disagree with this view, since all animals are crucial for the environment, and thus we should preserve all of them.
On the one hand, those who believe that we should preserve animals which are beneficial, argue that governments have limited fundings. Protecting animals requires creating safe environment, doing researches and observing using special machinery. All this activities requires significant funding, so it is more practical to focus on species that provide economic or medical benefits. For instance, bees pollinate crops and are essential for food production or fish support the fishing industry. In addition, those animals which are useful for society direct benefits to humans. In our world, animals such as fishes, horses and chicken provide us with food and help us in some cases. For instance, often horses are main vehicle in rural areas, or chickens provide individuals with food and eggs.
On the other hand, other animals in world biodiversity have their own advantages. First of all, every species plays an important role in ecosystems. For example, wolves control deer populations, frogs reduce insect populations, and vultures remove dead animals and reduce disease spread. Therefore, without one animal food chain become unstable and biodiversity declines. Moreover, we cannot accurately predict future value, so animals that seem useless today may become valuable tomorrow. All animals can have potential value: some animals have developed health care system and even nowadays scientists continue discovering medical compounds from wildlife.
In conclusion, while both views have their own merits, i wholeheartedly believe that in our modern technology-driven world it is crucial to protect all animals from extinction in order to maintain stable biodiversity in wildlife.