Both government and individual are spending vast amount of money protecting animals and their habitats. This money could be better spent dealing with fundamental issues in society such as poverty and healthcare. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Both government and individuals are believed to spending vast amounts of money protecting the animal kingdom

instead

of paying for important problems in society

such

as poverty and healthcare. To some ,extent I agree with

this

opinion for some reasons, but I still believe that there are other aspects to consider. On the one hand, there are two reasons why I agree with those who think doing expenses for social issues is essential. Nowadays, plenty of production companies rely on technological advances. Result , excess people have remained unemployed which means they can not get any income. If government spend their money on more vacancies, we can reduce poverty. There are several benefits when ensuring the safety of wildlife.

Firstly

, a handful number of rare animals would be on the edge of extinction;

therefore

, unless the construction of wildlife sanctuaries gives financial aid by authorities, the existence of some kind of endangered animals would be assured because overfishing and poaching may be underused.

Secondly

, the reliance on animal behaviours may help scientists to define the best method for the preservation of the natural habitat.

For example

, some kinds of crocodiles have abilities to make predictions about unprecedented events

such

as earthquakes, tsunamis or hail. In conclusion, I have mixed opinions about the discussed topic and certain cases could be true for different circumstances.

That is

why holding a firm opinion about it is more difficult than it seems and balance should be the priority in my view.