Some people think that human needs for farmland, housing, and industry are more important than saving land for endangered animals. Do you agree or disagree with this point of view? Why or why not? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. |
There has been a argument about what is more important between human need for farmland , housing and industry and saving land for endangered animals. Some people say that human being is superior to animals. However, although human need and life is important, animal’s life is also important. First of all, disappearance of one spiceies cause nature web serious problems. Plants and animal and human being is connected each other. For example, let’s assume that rabbit is extingushied due to disappearance of habitat in on area. This affect nature’ delicate balance,which increase the number of wolves. Increased wolves may attack cattle or even people due to food shortage. Therefore, imbalance of nature is one of the main reason I vote against humanneed is superior. Second, there is no choice to find another habitat for endangered animals. Endangered animal will die if they lose their habitat. Otherwise, human may find other area to farm, dwell on and to work. For example, polar bear can only live in cold area. If people construct numerous building and factory, temperature of inherent cold area become mild due to carbon dioxide or holes in ozone . If so, polar bear lose food and cannot live there. I believe that there are many sites to be developed in a earth. But there is no space to prepare for living polar bear in an earth. . |