Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take

How far should we as a society attempt to save the endangered species? Should we help them only in case we have caused the harm or should we help them because we understand their pain ? There are many species which have died due to human encroachment, and suffered a great loss. While human population has increased from 2 billion to 8 billion in last 200 years, many species have died because of our attack on natural habitat. At least now we should realize that we should come forward and revive them back into this world, independent of the fact who caused the harm. This is only possible by implementing proper policy and covering all regions.

Consider the Indian tiger, which are found in western parts of India, there population came down to 1000 in the recent years and still decreasing. They are killed for their skin and various body parts which are used for different purposes, mostly for superstition and orthodox beliefs. They might be predators but they are balancing the food chain and natural life cycle. It may get imbalanced due to human intervention. These species hunt the weak links of the wild part and keep the wild life healthy. If we as policy makers doesn't save them by imposing sever punishments on the hunters, then the whole wild life balance may change and overall health of other species may get affected.

Also, because of global warming many other polar regions are getting affected. Even we are directly affecting those regions but these temperature rise is the causing many polar wild life a grave danger. We as a society try to take steps to overcome this environment change, by encouraging more eco-friendly products than petroleum products. This may cause little disturbance in present market functionality but if not done today then it may cost more in future, by some estimates the expenses to undo these effect will cost many more trillions dollars in 2100 than today.

Not only the terestrial life need to be considered, the aquatic life which is seriously hampered by human presence. The rise in water temperature caused loss many coral reefs, and immense fishing has left many aquatic species in state of near extinction. Not only their life is disturbed directly but also indireclty, as in case of coral reefs. Only correct policy measures to stop fishing of some species and limiting the fishing troops can save them, all this will cause temporary disruption but will bear fruits in long term.

Ultimately, from the bulk of evidence, we can conclude that there is a urgent need of the policy which will check the terrestrial, polar and aquatic life balance , even if it causes temporary disruptions in our life. We are humans, who can understand others pain, thus it is our duty to save them by bearing some pain.