In recent times, conservation of some endangered species has become essential.Many protective zones are erected to save the biodiversity and keep individuals aware. But, some people oppose by stating that this can decline their mental condition and also restricts them of their natural habitat. I think that this both views are correct in their own’s prospective and my opinion is also articulated below.
The primary reason for the development in such areas is to spread awareness and also to protect the animals and birds. Hence, they were constructed in order to preserve the natural wealth of the world for they are now in a danger of being extinct. Eventually, such regions can increase their numbers throughout the world and can also prevent them to reach on a verge of extinction.Hence, this sort of places provide a suitable habitat and can also rise their lifespan. For an example several National parks and bird sanctuaries have been started to cherish their way of living.
Contrarily, some are against these institutions. They see this matter from different angle and argue that this can be harmful for the health of animals. This may even deprive them since living in a one particular area can some time cause effects on their skills of hunting or camouflaging. Further more, it is said to be illegal as keeping them in a cage is not preferable according to their needs and wants. Additionally, they can also feel mental toughness and physical problems as a result of being dependent on others. Due to this, they do not get a chance to socialise themselves and cannot be fit to face any situations.
In conclusion, I believe that the national parks and sanctuaries are developed to take care of the rare species which are not noticed by anyone. So, as per this, they are right on their own place but, few intellectuals does not support such sort of developments and represent their belief against it. Although, I opine that they should be supportive if, they want the next generation to see these kind of species which are not common.