Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of resources. to what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some people claimed that it is wasting money on

wildlife

conservation because there has been no room for wild animals contemporarily. From my point of view, I totally disagree with

this

statement.

First

of all, it is not true that wild species have no room in the 21st century. Nature is not existing for human beings’ benefits sorely, and human has no right to allow or control any extinction of any species. To be more specific, there is no particular evidence showing that people will destroy all animal habitats in the world.

On the contrary

, most people believed in coexisting with wild species, and

also

, the authorities built plenty of safaris and animal conservation centres to ensure decent habitants being available for

wildlife

now and

then

.

Secondly

, I

also

do not agree that the protection of animals is wasting resources because scientists have proved that protecting animals and their habitats are crucial for human survivals.

For instance

, rainforests can generate oxygen and absorb carbon dioxide which stabilizes the climate on the earth. If we damaged all the rainforests, the cost of tackling global warming and extreme weather would far more outweigh the money spending on rainforest conservation. In a result, by protecting

wildlife

, we are able to maintain a balance of nature and the human living environment. In conclusion, in my opinion, human beings have no right to decide whether

wildlife

should exist on the earth, and we should try our best to protect the wild animals for the benefits of human survivals.