It is often said that government spend too much money on projects to protect wildlife, while there are other problems that are more important. Do you agree or disagree?

It is believed by many people that the authorities allocate unnecessary significant funding to protect

animals

’ life. They hold the belief that there are more critical issues requiring

such

funds. I personally, completely disagree with

this

perspective for many reasons.

Firstly

, many wild

animals

are in danger of extinction and need protective programs.

Secondly

, for many countries,

wildlife

is part of the country identity and

this

attracts many tourists and represents a great source of income.

First

of all, government intervention has helped significantly in decreasing the risk of extinction for many species. Establishing nature reserves conserved

Animals

’ habitats ,

thus

giving them the chance to grow peacefully without humans activities that endanger their lives

such

as hunting and killing them to sell their leathers or furs. Another important point is authorities implement strict penalties on hunters and locals for murdering endangered

animals

.

This

has deterred many of them from killing

animals

and helped preserve their life.

Secondly

, For many countries

wildlife

is a part of their culture and identity.

For example

, Africa is renowned for its spectacular

wildlife

views.

This

depicts a great destination for adventure lovers. According to recent studies, Kenya,

for example

, has been making a substantial income from

wildlife

tourism in the past 5 years.

Therefore

, investing in

animals

’ preservation has been beneficial for the country’s economy as well as preserving a vital part of its culture and image. In conclusion, I restate my position that all the money allocated for preserving

wildlife

is justified. Due to

animals

reserves and strict punishments on hunters, many species were saved and are no longer in danger of extinction.