Some people think that a huge amount of time and money is spent on the protection of wild animals, and that this money could be better spent on the human population. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion

It is often argued that the

government

spent a large sum of money on the protection of wildlife while some people believe that it could be more beneficial if it were spent on mankind. I strongly disagree with the statement.

Hence

, it would be beneficial to protect wild

animals

in our ecosystem. To start with, there is no doubt that

animals

provide essential things to our planet or human beings. Without them, the balance of nature would not be possible because our ecosystem works with a lifecycle.

Moreover

, they provide numerous benefits to the humans

such

as food, medicine and clothes. There are many poor countries where people's life depends on livestock.

For instance

, 30 per cent of population life depends on cattle.

Therefore

, the protection of nature is more significant than the human population.

Furthermore

, if the

government

spent more on forest safety that will

also

protect many endangered species. As we have seen in the

last

many

decade

Fix the agreement mistake

decades

show examples

extinction of species increased rapidly in various regions.

Therefore

, authorities should invest more in the survival of these

animals

.

For example

, 40 per cent of birds are extinct because of ecosystem imbalance.

Thus

, the protection of forests provides a great relief to these species.

Nevertheless

, the population is increasing sharply on our planet, so there are children badly malnourished. The

government

will

also

work on these issues and spent more budget to resolve mankind's problems. To conclude, undoubtedly wild

animals

provide enormous things to our nature so the

government

must utilize their money to protect these creatures.