Some people believe that all wild animals should be protected. Others say that only a few wild animals should be protected.
DISCUSS BOTH VIEWS AND GIVE YOUR OPINION.
It is true that people hold different opinions to the extent to which wild animals should be protected. While some argue that the protection should be for only few wild animals, I firmly believe that all wild animals ought to be preserved.
One the one hand, it is said that some animals do not bring any benefits to humans at all such as rats and some kinds of insects. These animals are not important to ecosystem and they are even harmful to humans 'lives. For example, rats eat food that human produced and spread viruses on their bodies and make humans infectious to some disease. Besides, some also indicated that we are overspend money on wild animals by building a lot of zoos and conservation sites to protect them and organizing numerous campaigns to raise people' s awareness about the importance of wild animal protection. This amount of money should be spent on solving issues of human beings such as hunger and property.
One the other hand, I strongly agree with the viewpoint that all wildlife should be under protection. Firstly, each animal in nature plays certain role in the ecosystem, which benefits to us in one way or another. For example, in highland areas, thanks to worms, after heavy rains, soil is kept on the lands, whereby, alleviate floods and protect humans' lives. Secondly, wild animals are a rich resource for research. Scientists usually analyze wild animals and their exploration can acknowledge humans about nature and some show that some parts of a number of wild animals can be potential medicines.
In conclusion, the debate of whether all or just few wild animals should be under protection is still constant. In my opinion, it is necessary to conserve all wild animal.