Some people think that resources should be spent on protecting wild animals, while others think those would be better used for the human population. discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

While there is so much human suffering, the spending of resources to protect wild animals presents an ethical dilemma. However, I disagree with the opinion given, because it is possible to allocate resources intelligently to benefit both the animal and the human population. The protection of wild animals must be high on the agenda of every individual citizen and government. Firstly, the red list of endangered species in increasing every year. If wildlife extinction continues, then humans may face an ecological crisis which impacts on their own survival. For example, if the practice of whaling is not halted, the ecosystems of our oceans will be altered forever, and this may affect fish stocks on which so many communities depend for a living. Secondly, protecting wild animals means protecting the habitats in which they live, such as rainforests and wetlands. If habitat destruction is permitted, climate change will affect our capacity to produce food to sustain the growing human population. The formation of wildlife reserves not only protects wildlife, it also brings benefits to communities. In order to generate revenue for their management and to eliminate poaching, responsible ecotourism to observe animals in the wild can be developed further. This has been shown to create jobs in such places as the Serengeti National Park in Africa. The result is increased prosperity when local communities, especially in developing countries, are involved in the running of wildlife safaris, which attract visitors to the reserves. Thus, the application of intelligent strategies brings benefits for humans and wildlife. In conclusion, I disagree with the view expressed in the statement. It is in the interest of everyone to protect wildlife, and creative solutions have shown that this need not be a drain on scarce resources.