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?

Animals are the most important creatures of the world. Some people believed that animals should not be protected in this era. I am totally disagreeing with this because these are beneficial for our society.

The first advantage of wild animal is that children gain knowledge when they see them in the zoo. When these animals are kept in zoo, especially children, learn about their food, look, nature, as well as ecology. For instance, on every year in Australia numerous schools take their children to local zoos for increase their knowledge regarding animals and their categories. Many of them are helped later in their career when they study science.

The second reason for protecting wild animals is their skin is used to manufacture leather; whereas, various medicine are tested on their bodies. In other words, if wild animals are not saved, or people could not breed them properly, they are not able to take any advantage from it as well as humans cannot introduce new medical treatments. Russia, for instance, makes leather from the skin of snow leopards and administers new injections on elephants before introducing them in public. This example proves that wild animals are useful for us and should not be extinct from the era.

In conclusion, I disagree with the premises that wild animals are not being protected as they have no place in this century because they are useful for children to learn and increase their knowledge about them, various leather made from their skin and medicines tested on them.