Many people think that protection of wild animals from extinction is a waste of money because it is natural. I, however, only partly agree with this idea for the following reasons.
The main reason I partly agree with this idea is for the simple truth that government spends a large amount of money on protection of wild animals in developing countries; however, this money can be also spent on helping poor people. It can be illustrate by the fact that there are poor who want basic necessities such as food, drugs, and clothes, and so it might be more efficient to spend money on immediate needs for human. A further reason is that while some people in underdeveloped countries, even in developed countries do not have permanent places to live, which mean that it could be urgent to help people than animals.
On the other hand, I disagree slightly because wild animals can actually be useful for people: scientists do experiments in organ of animals so they can generate new medicines to help people who suffer severe symptoms get better. Wild animals might be beneficial for study of evolution that make human understand the change in the characteristics of their species over several generations easily and they can also attract more tourists which can improve the economic condition of a country. All in all, protection of wild animals can be helpful with human and bring many benefits.
In conclusion, although I agree with the presented idea up to a certain point, I also disagree for the reason given. I personally believe, that it is up to everybody to think carefully about this debatable question and come to their own conclusions.
Many
people
think
that protection of wild
animals
from extinction is a waste of
money
because
it is natural. I,
however
,
only
partly
agree
with this
idea
for the following reasons.
The main reason I partly
agree
with this
idea
is for the simple truth that
government
spends a large amount of
money
on protection of wild
animals
in developing
countries
;
however
, this
money
can be
also
spent on helping poor
people
. It can be
illustrate
by the fact that there are poor who want
basic necessities
such as food, drugs, and clothes, and
so
it might be more efficient to spend
money
on immediate needs for human. A
further
reason is that while
some
people
in underdeveloped
countries
, even in developed
countries
do not have permanent places to
live
, which mean that it could be urgent to
help
people
than animals.
On the other hand
, I disagree
slightly
because
wild
animals
can actually be useful for
people
: scientists do experiments in organ of
animals
so
they can generate new medicines to
help
people
who suffer severe symptoms
get
better. Wild
animals
might be beneficial for study of evolution that
make
human understand the
change
in the characteristics of their species over several generations
easily and
they can
also
attract more tourists which can
improve
the economic condition of a
country
. All in all, protection of wild
animals
can be helpful with human and bring
many
benefits.
In conclusion
, although I
agree
with the presented
idea
up to a certain point, I
also
disagree for the reason
given
. I
personally
believe, that it is up to everybody to
think
carefully
about this debatable question and
come
to their
own
conclusions.