Prompt: Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of resources. Ċ What is your opinion on this? To what extent to you agree or disagree?

It is believed that wild animals should not exist in today's world and it is pointless to spend money to protect them. I completely disagree with the view, and this essay will explain the reasons why the idea is totally absurd. Ċ Firstly, the Earth has never been the living place for only human, and there is nothing particularly special about this century that people suddenly have the right to rule out the existence of other species. Moreover, there is no compelling reason why wild creatures should die out to make room for human civilization, as both mankind and other living organisms can share the environment and pursue symbiotic collaboration, the same as how it has happened throughout history. All in all, I believe that it should be our aim, and human should start to reconsider the damage we have caused to the wildlife's habitat, while they do nothing so significant to harm us. Ċ Secondly, I also think that it is unwise to state that preserving the wildlife is not worth the expense. Biodiversity is one of the crucial elements to maintain the balance of the natural habitat, which directly links to human survival. For example, scientists have proven that the presence of other species, along with men, form the food cycle in which one is dependent on another as a food source. In other words, if we let other species die out, we could face the danger of having limited dietary supply, yet with today's technology, it is irreversible to bring the animals back from extinction. Therefore, in my opinion, it is better to spend money now, although the cost is exorbitant than not and later regret it. Ċ In conclusion, we have no right to decide whether or not wild animals should exist, and I believe that we should do everything we can to protect them. It is not only a moral act but as well a way to protect our own living circumstance.