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 with this view?

In the fast-paced world, there is no place for wild

animals

to live, so trying to prevent them from extinction is supposed to be a waste the natural sources. I partly agree with

this

statement,

however

, I believe that defending wild

animals

is beneficial for the environment, and the reason why I think so will be illustrated with certain clues and ideas in the following paragraphs. On the one hand, spending resources on

wildlife

conservation may be useless.

This

means that the expenditure of government on building up zoos to keep endangered members of

wildlife

may affect on lives of people.

For instance

, some pollution problems,

such

as air pollution, and noise pollution are might be caused by

animals

in zoos in residential areas. Another good example is that

wildlife

can reduce the salaries of workers who are employed by the government.

On the other hand

, the conservation of wild

animals

is the responsibility of each individual, and

this

helps people to maintain the real state of nature.

Also

, every creature in the world is interrelated with others.

That is

why it is vital to protect an endangered species.

Furthermore

, people can manage to make the youngest generation see and know about the lives of wild

animals

in the future. All things considered, I can say that even though there are some disadvantages to

wildlife

conservation, the advantages have a good effect on human life.

Moreover

, fauna and flora are integral parts of life on earth.