Animals should be protected, within reason

The debate continues. Let's delve into Rebuttals.Rebuttal:Pro's Round 2: "Or what about pets?" They're not absolutely needed in society, though do bring comfort."The wolves and cougars out in the wild are larger, wilder versions of your puppies and kittens" I think this is an attempt at Appeal to Emotion, but it's weak. If it's wild, it's a threat."I don't think anyone with a heart would want to just over hunt, fish, or farm animals until they are extinct." The heart clouds judgement. It's a beast, which is hostile. Do you simply let it do whatever it wants? What about if you had a gun, and the beast is nearing you?Pro's Round 3:"Have you no heart? It is that kind of thinking that starts wars." I do have some heart, but I usually only use it for pumping blood through my body. By that, I mean I don't let emotions cloud my judgement."For example, take when Spain and Britain conquered the Americas. They pretty much considered the Native Americans animals, and slaughtered them as such. All so they could take control of the resources here in America, to "expand their territory"."But animals are animals. The Native Americans are human. Though I do see where the Spanish came from, eliminating the natives in hopes for conquest."The thing is, saving places of wildlife drives to humanity to new discoveries. We could learn a lot just by studying the way ants and beavers build their houses, or how the animals in environments hostile to humans survive. Which could lead to us being able to survive on Mars(giving us much more population room than conquering all of Earth) or curing cancer."Ants are colonies, much like us humans. We fight, we die, we conquer. Beavers build dams. Predators hunt, like humans. I don't think animals cure cancer. My point is, conquer as the ants do, then leave the ants behind.And I have heard that NASA is researching giraffes to make better space suits. We can save the giraffes until they're no longer necessary."Do you want to give up barbeques, or hot dogs at baseball games? I highly doubt that we could find a vegan substitute that tastes the same."Sure, why not? Well, we could still have animal factories for the meat. But we don't need meat to survive, it just makes life better."the "beasts" you suggest we kill off are not actually hostile to humans unless provoked, or unless humans take away all their land and starve enough to be desperate to eat humans as food, which would be our own fault."So then a war starts. But, honestly, we're superior to lions and gorillas. There's several animals we could do without; birds, sharks, whales, snakes, and, yes, even wolves (Sorry Ammy).Argument:It's about survival, my dear friend. The resources are there, waiting to be found and collected. Yeah, animals can act in self-defense, but it doesn't change the fact that we're the better race. Well, let's look at it a better way.Much of the land is covered with trees. We can get wood from the trees. Cutting down the trees, we get land where we build any needed factories or farms. I guess we'd come along a Boa Constrictor or a white wolf, but they don't bring any advantage to society. We can kill them, and sell their remains.But people are probably asking now: Why are humans important enough to replace wolves, snakes, and elephants?Humans are the only creatures that can comprehend right/wrong desicions. What would a gorilla do: Take the banana, or save his mother? (Actually, I'm not sure. What WOULD he do?)Humans can defend themselves with guns. Can gorillas work a shotgun?Humans work at factories. Gorillas take a bit more training.What animals have an advantage over humans? (Well, aside from breathing underwater and flying.)