In recent years, there has been growing debate about whether we should protect all wild animals or some of them. While some believe that we have to preserve some endangered wild animals instead of all, others argue that we need all type of wild species. From my perspective, I completely believe that all type of wild animals should be preserved.
One compelling reason is that particular animal species may be threat rather than benefit for nature. People believe that certain species might create a problem for farmers by killing useful animals such as a cow, sheep, and chicken. For instance, bears, wolves and other wild animals may hunt their domestic animals and place a threat on their property. As a result, individuals consider that wild animals are risky and should be killed or hunted. According to some, however, they should not be endangered and strictly protected even if they are wild and can threat for certain beneficial animals.
In my view, however, all animals are paramount and each one has its own responsibility even if they seem useless animals at first glance. Each wild animal plays a pivotal role in nature by reducing the number of herbivore animals. Take, the case of tigers or foxes that kill some herbivore animals to maintain their amount in balance, thereby reducing the risk of environment, otherwise animals such as mice or rabbit can create an issue by attacking the agricultural industries.
To conclude, while some people statements about the reducing the number of wild animals can be acceptable because they are scared due to certain reasons, their benefits should not be overlooked. I completely believe that the advantages of protecting wild animals outweigh its possible drawbacks.