With the prevalence of certain individuals, people assert that they should be responsible for the conservation of wildlife. I largely support this view because of potential benefits, ranging from keeping a balance of biodiversity species and providing sustainable natural processes.
One such significant advantage is improved biodiversity in a few ecosystems. With adequate preventing some events that influence the extinction of wild animals and birds, such as hunting, poaching, and pollution. This results in stabilizing the numbers of endangered species in particular areas that are numbers of inhabitants has fallen. The USA is a pertinent case in point; having stunning flora and fauna, national parks, and zoos, this country is known to have a generally conservation-minded attitude toward animals, compared to the countries that
lack these events. On top of that, these opportunities help the development of tourism in countries that can take advantage of improved economic conditions. Thus, it is beneficial for wildlife, which is integral to the world’s ecosystems.
A further adverse implication is the deterioration of animals and birds. Other threats to wildlife include the introduction of invasive species from other parts of the world, climate change, pollution, hunting, fishing, and poaching. For instance, global warming is one of the key reasons which is influenced for numbers of wildlife, due to the increasing average temperature of the world, which causes the water level to rise sharply, hence badly affecting the lives of bears. This shift indicates that people are the main enemy of wildlife.
In conclusion, I concur with the notion that people should protect wildlife for two major reasons; one is that maintaining biodiversity of species, while improved balance of nature’s processes