One school of thought holds that allocating funds and time to protect wildlife is a waste of resources, and these could be better utilized to benefit the human population. Although spending on wild animal preservation can indeed have benefits to humanity, I completely agree with the notion.
On the one hand, it is reasonable to provide financial support for wildlife protections. In fact, by saving animals, humans are saving themselves. Animals might hold the key to certain medical breaks, as many important modern components are found in animals and plants. Furthermore, humans, animals, and other living things all together form a giant ecosystem whereby each part can influence each other. If a certain species becomes less common, this, in turn, will reduce the population of animals that prey on it, which is more likely to disrupt the ecological balance and eventually threatens the survival of human society.
However, I believe that wildlife protection should not be the primary concern at the moment, as more urgent issues require long-term investment from the government. Overpopulation, a global problem, has led to housing shortage and poverty in many countries. Investigating buildings and infrastructure in remote areas rather than protecting wild animals, the government can create a better population distribution, job opportunities and improve people’s quality of life. Furthermore, by spending more on education, the government will cultivate a pool of young competent workers, driving economic growth which is beneficial for both society and animals.
In conclusion, I somewhat believe that though an investment in preserving animals may somehow maintain the balance of the ecosystem, our time and money should be more justifiably spent on important sectors of the economy to improve people’s living standards.