Many animals are in danger of extinction. Some people say that we should protect only those animals, which are useful to humans. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Throughout the history of mankind, several species of fauna have died out. However, despite appreciating this fact, some suggest that the only crucial animals should be taken care of rather than all. I firmly disagree with this statement and shall discuss my view in further paragraphs.
Undeniably, certain animals are important assets and integrated into the daily life of humans,and have helped perpetuate human existence. To be precise, in terms of agricultural revolution, transportation and dairy food products consumption all started with cows and other species of animal kingdom that has been serving society; thus, these is considered to be the special for mankind and to ensure they should never reach the brink of extinction, they should not only be saved but also bred in huge numbers to help preserve species from a possible natural disaster.
However, even though the former claim may seem to be plausible in social and economic concerns, it falls flat in terms of environment: disappearance of any of the species has a potential to threaten all forms of life, including humans. It is undeniable that every living being is an integral part of a bigger ecological picture and the food chain, and if any of this vanishes, the whole system would crumble and collapse, affecting humans as a result. It is hard to overlook an instance that clearly corroborates this aspect: the man-made famine in China that resulted in extermination of birds that led to an increase in the population of pests, causing destruction of the crop.
Overall, although a few animals are essential to human lives to help in flourishing, other animals are equally important to maintain the food chain so that danger to human life can be eliminated entirely. Thus, all animals must be protected.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.