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.

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 we need the balance of environment. It goes without saying that mankind at different points of the time makes their effort to achieve his economic and financial goals without any consideration about the nature. However, in today's life we can see other visions about the environment that has brought us more boon than bane in finally. It is like that old saying:"there is a time for daring and there is time for caution". It is an old cliché, but I agree with it, and I think that this is the time of caution and saving our special nature and endangered animals can expose us to more benefit in the future.

Another rationale of why I take negative idea about the first perspective in the introductory paragraph is that we should care about other God's creatures. It is absolutely certain that we are not the only creature who has the right to live on the earth. in fact, we distinguish ourselves from animals just by speaking. So we are such kind of animal and it is not fare to endangered other animals just for obviate our needs. Besides, we should not remove the chance of future human generations to get pleasure from earth's habitat and animals. As a corollary, I tend to preserve animals as far as I can do it.

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 people believe our mission is to get pleasure from our lives. This significantly lies in the fact that, our time to be alive is limited and we should use anything including animals to satisfy our needs.

To put it in a nutshell in light of the previously discussed reasons, the viewpoint of those who believe mankind can get more pleasure is accepted occasionally, though the situation like using any animal to satisfy our needs without any limit, is too special and fairly rare that should not be taken as a general rule. Indeed, environmental balancing and care about other creatures are prime factors to my propensity for choosing protects endangered animals. If I could have a chance to decision making, I do not have a bit of hesitation to protect them.