Some people believe that all wild animals should be protected. Others say that only a few wild animals should be protected. Discuss both views give your opinion.

In this contemporary epoch, it is undeniable that the protection of wild animals is becoming more and more popular. There is a hotly-debated issue over whether all wild creatures or just a few wild creatures should be safeguarded. In this essay, both views will be objectively deliberated prior to a logical conclusion.

On the one hand, some people suppose that protecting wild animals is essential. To commence with, they put forward the moral argument that humans should not kill any animal in the wild. They believe that it is necessary for everyone to treat animals humanely and correctly condemn the many forms of animal exploitation and even animal slaughter in the world nowadays. Additionally, if we did not protect animals in the wild, it would seriously affect the ecosystem and the environment. All the animal violations like illegal hunting or trading and etc cause ecological imbalance, environmental pollution, and the decline of the maintenance of the species then causing extinction.

On the other hand, some people think that only a few creatures in the wild should be protected. First of all, it is true that guarding all the animals is a waste of our time and money. In other words, instead of protecting all the animals including both important and unimportant animals, we can spend time doing useful activities which can safeguard rare animals. Furthermore, there are also many harmful and unimportant animals in the wild. Rats, for example, are everywhere and a danger to human health, contaminating food and carrying diseases. If their numbers were not reduced, the consequences would be serious.

In conclusion, I hold a firm belief that priority protection should be given to a few wild animals, specifically some creatures are in danger of becoming extinct.