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?

In today's hectic life it is astonishing fact that people from all walks of life differ greatly in their attitudes towards this phenomenon. We find that some people hold the great idea that human needs are most important, on the other hand others may have an opposite idea. From my perspective, I would side with the latter. So, as Hollywood celebrities say:"Let's cut to the chase."

Taking my view into account the reason which may shed some light on my point is that it can remove wildlife. It goes without saying that people at different corners of the world are making a lot of efforts to gain more pleasure form wild habitat. In fact they tend to use tree in industry, animals for luxurious stuff, more land for agriculture and so on. Let me put in this way, this trend will diminish our precious resources in earth which cannot be replenish. Besides, people will become more thirst to consume all of resources without any care about future generation.

Another rationale of why I take negative idea about the first perspective in the introductory paragraph is about technology. It is absolutely certain that there are people who are manifestly willing to delve deeper to into technology and want to quench their thirst of acquiring more progress without any harm to nature. This argument goes on to assert that, technology is one of the most substantial cultural revolutions we have had in this plane. Therefore, people can make innovation in order to protect wild habitat including online book instead of text book and hi-tech agriculture instead of traditional one. As a result, technology has brought more boon than bane to preserve nature.

Nevertheless, the two paragraphs in the body should not be over generalized. Just as an old adage goes:"a coin has two sides", those who take the other side are partially reasonable every once in a while. That is, there might be a situation in which some guys says human is the master of creators in land. This significantly lies in the fact that, God gives human a virtue to spend other creators to satisfy his needs. All in all, it is normal for mankind to get success in this rat race.

To put it in a nutshell in light of the previously discussed reasons, the viewpoint of those who believe mankind can use all of resources in earth is accepted occasionally, though the situation like having virtue than other creators is too special and fairly rare that should not be taken as a general rule. Indeed, protect our resources in wild life and saving them by using technology are prime factors to my propensity for choosing protect endangered animals. If I could have a chance to decision making, I do not have a bit of hesitation to protect them.