Many believe that it is important to protect all wild animals, while others think that it is important to protect some, not all of them.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.
REPORTED ON 09 NOVEMBER, 2021
Unlike the past, many wild animals are at the verge of extinction. At this juncture, some feel that all of them need protection, while others think that it should be given only to those who face extreme threat. I would align to the first view, but a critical analysis is necessary before framing the conclusion.
The reason why some feel that wildlife conservation should be made exclusively to selected species is because of the increased incidents of species extinction. To be precise, each year, at least one wildlife species is being vanished from the earth, and the interesting fact is that today’s generation has not seen many animals their immediate predecessors had seen. The number of animals like the African rhinoceros, Siberian tigers and Himalayan pandas is now at the lowest. Therefore, it becomes the responsibility of the governments to preserve their lives and minimize the threat it faces from humans.
However, others feel that protection should be given to all animals that are categorized as ‘wild’. The reason why they think so is because of the strong interdependence between them. As these animals live in the same habitat, and they are closely related to each other either directly or indirectly. For example, if the number of wild buffaloes and wild goats declines beyond a limit, many big carnivores like lions and tigers would face natural extinction, out of starvation. Therefore, an organized plan has to be formulated to protect the whole wildlife as a collective unit.
After analyzing both these views in detail, albeit it is pivotal to give exclusive protection to endangered species, I believe, if a wholesome protection is provided to the entire wildlife, which minimizes the human intervention, it would be better.
Word count: 288