Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of resources. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is incontrovertible that wildlife conservation is now becoming a topic of concern. While some people hold the opinion that endangered animals no longer prove to be vital to humans in the 21st century, I totally disagree with this assertion, as the flora and fauna are undoubtedly an indispensable part of our lives.
It is common knowledge that wildlife hold the key values in terms of education, especially when considering human development and medical purposes. First of all, there has always been a correlation between human beings and nature, and studying this special relationship would reveal an enormous amount of information that could then be used to facilitate the development of humans. Taking some types of monkeys, for instance, it is clear that many of them have a similar genetic system to that of humans. As a result, should researchers continue to explore how these genes function and revolutionize, they might be able to predict how people will become in the far future. Furthermore, some species have the unique capability of preventing specific diseases that people are vulnerable to. Consequently, the more workable measures people take to rescue these animals from the verge of extinction, the more likely they are to be able to study and develop medical methods for countering these infectious diseases.
Despite these aforementioned benefits of wild animal protection, some opponents of this standpoint grant that it is such a time-consuming and wasteful attempt to conserve these animals that more resources should be allocated to other crucial problems. Although this may be true to some extent, it is a unilateral and shortsighted viewpoint. It is undeniably agreed that protected animals are beneficial, and when one of them permanently disappears, it might lead to inalienable detriment. For example, some birds feed on insects, which is the most naturally efficient way of protecting crops from being damaged by bugs or insects. As a consequence, without the appearance of these species, crops may deteriorate and have no chance of reaching the desired stage of harvesting. Additionally, the fact that people have to overcome these negative outcomes is absolutely time- and resource-wasting.
In conclusion, notwithstanding the evidence cited to support the consensus that wild residences are now valueless, I totally assert that there are numerous advantages to protecting endangered animals.