Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, and the protection is a waste of resources.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
The current global (extinction crisis) is one of the greatest challenges posed by the rapid expansion of human populations. The protection of (endangered species), as far as I can see, should be a top priority for three main reasons: economic value, scientific value, and survival value.
Wild animals provide many valuable substances, such as meat, skins and furs. The (financial) value of wild species is important to the economies of many nations. In many countries the (recreational) viewing of animals at zoos is also a source of revenue. The study of wildlife, on the other hand, provides valuable knowledge about various life processes. Such study has helped scientists understand how the human body (functions) and why people behave as they do. Scientists have also gained medical knowledge and discovered important medical products by studying wildlife. In addition, by (observing) the effect of environmental pollution on wild animals, scientists have learned how pollution affects human life.
(Furthermore), every species of wildlife plays a role in helping maintain the balanced, living systems of the Earth. These systems must continue to function if life is to survive. Thus, the loss of any species can (threaten) the survival of all life, including human beings.
In conclusion, the protection of wild animals in the 21st century is by no means a waste of resources; on the contrary, its importance should ever be more (stressed) by international organizations, government agencies, industry and individuals for the valuable resources the wild animals provide us and for human (survival).
