Some people believe that all species of animals should be protected fairly, while others oppose this idea, asserting that only certain animals, especially those on the edge of extinction or which are important for humanity, can have a right to be preserved. Although strong arguments can be seen on both sides, I agree with the former viewpoint.
Admittedly, there are several reasons for supporting the view of protecting only particular animals, the most notable one being the financial matters. Protecting animals means showing them care, treating them properly, and making sure that they have a healthy life balance to maintain genetic variety. All of these treatments require professional experts, special habitats, and a large amount of funding, which are, in turn, may be impossible to provide for all animals at the same time. As a result, governments may be forced to be more selective between species.
Notwithstanding the argument above, I agree with those who argue that every animal should be treated fairly. This is due to the fact that selecting certain animals to protect may leave other species untreated. This lack of treatment for some species can distort the balance of nature, resulting in the extinction of many animals. For example, if governments focus only on endangered animals and show special care for them, the number of these species may gradually increase, ruining the food chain in the nature.
In conclusion, although the lack of sufficient funding may be the valid argument for selecting particular animals for special care, I personally support the faithful treatment of all animals as it can lead to serious dangers.