Prompt: Ex: 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?

Recently, there is a notion that there is not enough place for wild animals to survive in this era. Therefore, efforts to conserve animals can be a meaningless and squander of resources; nevertheless, I firmly believe that the existence of wild life plays an indispensable role in human life. This essay will point out reasons for my statement. Ċ To begin with, animals provide mankind with a great amount of scientific resources. Many elements contained in body of wild species are really valuable in the process of researching science, especially in biology and chemistry. To illustrate, genetic code of monkey and gorilla, which has lots of similarities to human's one, is used ubiquitously in process of developing medicine as well as curing methods for man. Besides, white mouse has been considered as one of the most ideal samples for most of medical experiments since the laboratory was established. Ċ Furthermore, the survival of wild animals have always related directly to the existence of all species. If there are too many animals die out, the diversity of eco-system will be destroy, consequently, the loss of biodiversity will not only put human but also all kinds of living creatures at risks of extinction. For instance, pollination of many plants cannot be happened without participation of insects such as butterflies or bees, this will lead to the disappearance of worldwide flora. Moreover, without animals, people will have no milk to drink, no pets to raise and no meat to eat. Ċ In conclusion, due to the need of wild animals in biodiversity and scientific research. It is obvious that appearances of these species in this era put a blessing than a burden to mankind, therefore, people need to protect them even if it consume lots resources.