Protecting animals and birds is undeniably vital for environmental sustainability. However, their protection is believed to be taking excessive attention and resources. I largely disagree with this viewpoint.
Human impact on wildlife is more significant than some initially anticipated. Countries worldwide are expanding industrial units for their economic prosperity, often destroying the pristine environment that serves as habitats for diverse species, which are unlikely to survive in new territories after adapting to the original surroundings. Furthermore, new factories and other industrial facilities require more energy, often resulting in increased consumption of fossil fuels. More carbon dioxide is produced and emitted from the burning of fossil fuels, which may concern both animals and humans, especially the former, who are far more vulnerable to atmospheric pollution due to the lack of medical care.
Nevertheless, people are allocating insufficient resources and attention to the animal kingdom. There are relatively few nature reserves available while humans continue to destroy precious habitats, contributing to deforestation and desertification. Moreover, these protected areas are usually too small and isolated, which reduces their effectiveness due to inadequate management and governance. The rising carbon footprint is also affecting animals and birds, not only their health but also their habitats. For example, because of the annual increase in global temperatures, Arctic ice is melting, subsequently leaving its biodiversity, such as polar bears and penguins, with no home.
In conclusion, while we are actively destroying many species’ homes for economic benefits, we are providing few and small reserves and support for these creatures. Therefore, I hold the firm opinion that our attention and resources devoted to animals and birds are not enough to fully ensure their safety and survival.