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?

It is true that the human population has increased over the years in the ways through which we take up the land that was once called house of the wild

animals

. It is thought that people should spend a large amount of budget and human resources on taking care of wild

animals

,

while

the opposing point of view would be using

money

to serve human life. The latter view is reasonable, which means that I disagree with the former one. On the one hand, wild

animals

bring advantages and disadvantages. For one thing, they are among the most prevalent subjects spreading severe contagions. Now that in the natural environments, there is no doubt that wild fauna’s physical conditions can be affected greatly during the mating process, food chains, or parasites, which is incredibly dangerous if

humans

come into connect with them. For illustration, the COVID-19 pandemic originated from bats in the WuHan area in China and caused damage to

humans

,

consequently

, forming the disease spreading among the persons.

By contrast

, wild

animals

grow up with significant ecosystem diversity, which offers potential remedies to treat human diseases. A perfectly good demonstration

that is

worth noticing is that snake venom can help individuals resist poison when bitten, which is prepared into drugs to reduce blood pressure.

On the other hand

, investing in human life is an urgent thing.

For instance

, we need to spend a huge amount of

money

and

time

to increase education. In some areas in Africa, children are not going to school as they have no subsidy

money

, and the lack of food sources, freshwater, and infrastructure results in many evils in Africa affecting world peace. As for

such

a purpose of pedagogical/educational aspects, in developed nations, applying social media for advertising showcasing the living conditions of these wild

animals

could be regarded as a remarkable solution to the problems of people’s poor awareness of preserving wilderness. Another essential point to consider is that

humans

are high-level

animals

that are more affluent than other species, so the focus on monetary and

time

issues is suggested to be put on

humans

in advance. In brief, if

humans

have inventions that serve their lives, they will afterwards return to animal protection. Of course, the higher possibility of every scientific outcome always requires more radical methods with expensive high-tech aids that will surely cost more

time

. In conclusion, wild animal protection is needed in the natural ecosystem;

however

, investment for

humans

remains more crucial. Since the growth of the human population cannot be stopped, governments,

as well as

individuals, should be well aware of doing something about how much

time

and

money

can be invested

according to

such

particularly current circumstances.