Many animals are endangered. Some people argue that we should only protect animals that are useful to humans. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Since time immemorial,

animals

have been disappeared from

this

world for several reasons, but humans are not facing so many problems because of

this

phenomenon in that all

animals

are not beneficial for mankind.

Consequently

, there has been a growing body of opinion that initiatives should be taken only to protect

animals

that are useful for humans. Being a rational mind, I, too, assent to

this

notion, for I am of the view that saving some wild

animals

are costly and harmful. Among the ratiocination to buttress my stance, the one that deals with the significance of preserving only crucial

animals

as a way of saving money.

In other words

, if a country’s government had to spend money on all wildlife’s preservation, the total expense would be exorbitant, causing a shortage of funds for more pressing social issues,

such

as education, security, health, and suchlike.

Therefore

, a nation should take the necessary steps only to protect important

animals

, namely, dogs, cows, goats, to name but a few. To cite an example, an empirical study conducted by Oxford University reveals that only 20% of

animals

are necessary for humankind; so a state can easily cut its costs for the protection of all

animals

and invest the surplus amount in the development works. Another critical rationale in reference to why all wild

animals

should not be protected is necessarily synonymous with deterring people from dangers.

That is

to say, most of the

animals

staying in a jungle are ferocious and harmful for humans. So, if a country takes initiatives in order to protect all

animals

, it is one of the ways to lead the general public to death. To exemplify, in South Africa, it is not allowed to shoot or kill any

animals

much as they enter into the residential area, resulting in losing hundreds of lives every year.

Hence

, with a view to protecting people from dangerous

animals

, governments ought not to focus on wildlife. In conclusion, inasmuch as preserving facilities are costly and some

animals

are dangerous for humankind, people should only think about how to protect useful

animals

so that they can meet their needs.