It has been argued that wildlife projects are expensive and consume too much amount of a country's GDP, resulting in the less funding for some important projects like health and education. In my opinion, I agree with this as the basic necessities of life, like provision of medicine and schooling, must take priority.
Animal care and protection is necessary but not at the cost of welfare schemes for the local population. Although, it's the duty of government to look after wild beasts and prevent them from extinction, but in doing so a huge amount of revenue is being consumed. This, in turn, will increase the burden on the treasury of a country and there will be a decline in the spending of budget on other sectors of importance. So, there will be a direct effect of this on the living conditions of human beings. For instance, the same issue has already been highlighted in the United Nations general assembly session of 2009.
The prime responsibility of a ruler is to uplift the living standards of fellow countrymen by providing them with the best available basic needs of life specially hospital facilities and educational institutions. Firstly, finance department must rationalise the distribution of resources on the basis of requirement. Secondly, humans must have an advantage over the animals. Moreover, it must be kept in mind that money consumed for the betterment of locals will be paid back in terms of prosperity. For example, all the developed nations have realised this fact and have fixed a specific portion for the upkeep of cattle.
To conclude, I think that requirements of individuals must take the priority over animals and head of states must keep this in mind before allotment of funds.
It has
been argued
that wildlife projects are expensive and consume too much amount of a country's GDP, resulting in the less funding for
some
important
projects like health and education. In my opinion, I
agree
with this as the
basic necessities
of life, like provision of medicine and schooling,
must
take priority.
Animal care and protection is necessary
but
not at the cost of welfare schemes for the local population. Although, it's the duty of
government
to look after wild beasts and
prevent
them from extinction,
but
in doing
so
a huge amount of revenue is
being consumed
. This, in turn, will increase the burden on the treasury of a country and there will be a decline in the spending of budget on other sectors of importance.
So
, there will be a direct effect of this on the living conditions of human beings.
For instance
, the same issue has already
been highlighted
in the United Nations general assembly session of 2009.
The prime responsibility of a ruler is to uplift the living standards of fellow countrymen by providing them with the best available basic needs of life
specially
hospital facilities and educational institutions.
Firstly
, finance department
must
rationalise
the distribution of resources on the basis of requirement.
Secondly
, humans
must
have an advantage over the animals.
Moreover
, it
must
be
kept
in mind that money consumed for the betterment of locals will
be paid
back in terms of prosperity.
For example
, all the developed nations have
realised
this fact and have
fixed
a specific portion for the upkeep of cattle.
To conclude
, I
think
that requirements of individuals
must
take the priority over animals and head of states
must
keep
this in mind
before
allotment of funds.