There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts -especially at a great cost in money and job to save endangered animal or plant species.

Should society allocate unlimited contribution financially to save endangered animals invariably,regardless that whether they are caused by natural selection or anthropogenic activities. I agree insofar as that human beings have the obligations to save endangered animals if the very reason of these bleak situations are caused by our inappropriate, intentional interference. While,if some species are dying merely from brutal but inexorable natural selection,then we should save our financial resource as well as workforce on higher priorities,for example advancing technologies that would facilitate our daily lives,efforts that strive to resolve third world starvation and transmitted diseases.

According to Darwinian theory,as the natural evolution goes on,species which do not have the capabilities to accustom changes, would hereby be ruled out by ecosystem. Since there is no scientific,accurate way to decide which reason,human or nature leads some animal and plants species meet their dire survival situations,allocating a great amount of financial support to research and implement solutions to delay their own fate,would be unreasonable,considering human resources are not infinite.

On the other hand,when we face the decision of whether making a difference to innocent lives or leaving them alone,we would be easily preoccupied by similar emotional bonds we share with cute-looking animals such as dolphins. Indeed,as the only intellectual species on earth,we are obligated with these duties to balance ecosystem because what are happening to those endangered animals and plants,would probably happen to us one day if we are so blind that could not see the intertwining relationships among species. The connections between predators and preys would be sufficient to illustrate this point. Without snakes to prey on rats,farmers would be deprived of replete and healthy grains which are essential to support lives in countrysides as well as cities. Even though the egregious behavior and records of snakes,the function of snakes,as a indispensable link is essential to reserve the harvest by eating up grain-wrecker rats.

Nevertheless,saving endangered animals and plants could not have immediate and profound in a short time in nature. Furthermore,who should be left to decide which species is worthy being saved over others. Researchers and environmental activists could be placed at this position because they are more likely to exaggerate the negative impact of not saving these species and they are more good at swaying people’s minds by means of implementing vague but imposing statistic figures and propaganda,but concentrating on planning on strategic solutions. With respect to governments officials who tend to correlate their political interests and environmental issues,are also not reasonable to be posed at this position.

To sum up,saving endangered animals is a complex issue. I agree that we should not save all endangered animals without discriminations because in modern societies there are higher priorities need to be solved immediately with a wealth of financial and human resources inputs. Moreover,who and how to determine which species should be saved first over others remains a debatable question.