Is the Preservation of Endangered Species Necessary?IntroductionIt has been debated for past decades on whether we should attempt to protect endangered species or not. Species that are ‘Endangered’ are considered in risk of extinction, clarified by observing the trends of their growth and decline. This topic brings up my concern as it does not only affect the animal kingdom, it also impacts the nation and its people. From what I believe, the wildlife is an artistic symbol of nature, yet a lot of money is required for a very small effect on their protection. It is important to be aware of the future consequences if we neglect or preserve endangered species, to consider multiple, or even contradicting perspectives to reach a balanced approach of this issue. This got me to think if the preservation of endangered species is necessary, if it was scientifically proven that all species will go extinct eventually. The 2 contradicting points encourage me to do further research on this topic.Global PerspectiveThe World Wildlife Fund (WWF) is a leading organisation in wildlife conservation, taking initiative to stop Earth’s natural environment degrading. The WWF believes the protection of wildlife not only will influence the support of survival of other species, but also offers the opportunity to protect whole landscapes.Regardless, there is a staggering cost involved in the process of saving endangered animals. Through a study in 2012 from Science magazine, scientists estimated that 76 billion USD is spent per year to preserve threatened land animals. Marine species cost far more. Instead of protecting species that are endangered, the vast amounts of money should instead be spent on funds and manpower on preventing common species being rare, preparing their habitats for climate change, which would have already been too late for many species. (Cressey)A recent report by WWF and the Zoological Society of London indicated that global populations of species have declined by 58% since 1970, suggesting that if the trend continues, the decline could reach ? by 2020. (Morelle) Nevertheless, the report is massively skewed towards western Europe, with less data from the tropics, where most species in the world thrive. This could be due to the lack of data from poorer regions of the world. Despite its flaws, the report is trying to prove to us that activities such as illegal wildlife trade, is destroying the wildlife; the fact that they are not extinct yet presents us with an opportunity to take action. Personally, I believe the fact that many people aren’t willing to to treat animals alike saving human lives is the main reason why the rate is increasing. When it comes to saving humans, the issue goes beyond money. In the US, an average of 680 million USD is spent annually for assistance of an average of 114 people per day in SAR operations (Bryant), while “only” around 57 million was spent on preservation of endangered species from government grants and contracts. (2017 Annual Report) In the 2010 CBD meeting, agreements were made on preventing species’ extinctions and decline of Earth’s natural systems. Yet, only few countries have made progress on those commitments. I think to accelerate the progress, MEDCs could aid LEDCs, like in the Lima Challenge, which commits to eliminate deforestation by 2030. Norway have agreements with LEDCs such as Brazil and Indonesia, to pay tropical countries for a verified performance in reducing deforestation. (Birdsall) This was proven to be effective as deforestation in Brazil decreased by 80% from the use of satellite data, without sacrificing agricultural growth or output. In the future, MEDCs should be encouraged to help LEDCs, to maximize the impacts towards conservation.The sources I used for this section was slightly harder to analysis compared to other sections, since they mostly provided biased information, especially from the WWF. On the other hand, this can be useful in showing multiple views on the same issue on a global scale, and suggests alternate angles for me to consider. The sources are also mostly accurate, as it is published on scientific news articles and from the world -recognised organisation, WWF.Local PerspectiveThe United States is one of the major parties involved in making attempts in preserving endangered animals. Under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), established by the US in 1973, provides conservation for species (and their ecosystems) that are listed under “endangered”. (“Endangered Species Act (ESA)”) Moreover, a National Poll in 2015 also shows that 90% of Americans support upholding the ESA. This would put pressure on the government, to uphold environmental safeguards and block political attacks against species. (Gade)However, it takes on average 12 years for a species to be listed after first consideration – by then it may be too late. (Gaind) In the future, the ESA could be more effective with more incentives offered to encourage others to get involved in the process, to have smarter investments made so the ES list is always updated. Furthermore, the ESA’s expenditure in 2012 may have been 1.7 billion, but it only translates to just $5.40 per US citizen; also, while some species receive more than 1 million in conservation funding, some, receive only 60USD in funding in 2012. In my opinion, this suggests that in the US, even animals are “chosen” due to their economical worth, which should not be the case, as every creature should be treated equally, just like people should be too. This is one of the imperfections within US’ ESA.We could compare the US’s (MEDC) approach towards endangered species with Indonesia (LEDC) – ranked first for country with the most threatened mammals – (Master) despite only occupying 1% of Earth’s land mass, its rainforest is home to 12% of the mammal species on Earth. (Peters)The Indonesian Council of Ulama has issued a fatwa, requiring its population to take an active role in protecting threatened species. Animals in Islamic religions are viewed as being key parts of an ecosystem, as creations of Allah. Muslim leaders believe that keeping species alive is part of the worship of God, giving guidance to Muslims on how wildlife protection will fit in with their values and beliefs. (“Indonesian Clerics Issue Fatwa”)Indonesia’s approach focuses more on providing a spiritual aspect and raising moral awareness. The nation attempts to inspire people everywhere in the world to protect threatened wildlife and their habitats. Religion plays a huge part in Indonesia, as most of the Indonesian population identify as Muslims. Nevertheless, Indonesia has to rely on foreign aid to preserve its wildlife. There can also be abuse of local people’s rights from the government, to remove people forcefully from lands the government believe should be preserved. (Birdsall)In my opinion, the US’s approach towards this issue may be more effective in terms of its influential power, yet Indonesia’s approach is more based around moral values. I highly agree with their viewpoint that often environmental issues are only debated in terms of economics (like the US). The fatwa reminds us that most people are motivated by beliefs, that sometimes things are not just about money. It reminds us that money can always be made again, yet once species are extinct, it cannot appear again. Indonesia may have to rely on foreign aid, but they do participate in global commitments, like in the Lima Challenge, that create a global impact.However, according to both countries’ economical power, on the long term, US would be more effective. Indonesia ‘s economy relies on actions that create disastrous consequences for the wildlife, such as logging.. So I reckon if Indonesia improves it’s economy could help preserve species. As a student, I strongly believe that investing in education would greatly improve the skills and knowledge of locals for higher income jobs than logging – according to a 2015 OECD report, providing every child with access to education and skills, would boost the country’s GDP by an average of 28% per year, for the next 80 years. This would both benefit Indonesia as a country and help save endangered species from their habitats being destroyed.In general education is only just one of the ways to boost a country’s economy, yet the reason why I chose to use my source was, the writer of the website, Borge Brende, is the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Norway, so his authority makes the information more reliable. Writing the local perspective was the the least challenging, as there were many sources that provided 2 points of view, and would link back to their own sources (reports, other websites etc.).Personal PerspectivePyron, Professor of Biology at George Washington University, has reported that he has spotted in 2013, an assumed extinct species of frog in 1995. (Pyron) From this, we can see that, despite spending 12 years to list an animal, it can still be inaccurate. Conservation, in the end, could be just to discharge our own guilt; our impulse to conserve “endangered species”, could mean all species, as all species would go extinct eventually, but quickened by our actions. We are trying to save species that we have helped to kill off. So what’s the point? I’ve come to notice that on the news more and more species are facing extinction worldwide, especially in the world’s major forests and marine areas. I feel like species going endangered is a wake up call before Mother Nature may truly disappear forever. Since we are conscious about the damage we have done, at this point, we can’t even tell if our development has lead to some species’ extinction, or if it’s just a natural process of evolution occuring. We are so focused onto ourselves that we forget about those that were here millenniums before us. So, we don’t really have a choice, but to save as many species as we can.In my daily life, instead of taking public transport, the car is often used. I’ve never really acknowledged how big the concern of wildlife destruction has grown into until I’ve taken in research myself. The government has already taken local actions, including charging money for plastic bags, yet individually we should take small actions, such as using public transport more often. These small actions from everyone can build into one big change, a change that would hopefully conserve the wildlife, for the centuries ahead.In the future, if there is a continuous rate of endangerment of species, many of our common species today may be gone in potentially decades time. It could be assumed that the same dilemma as the dodo birds, hunt to defunct by humans, would happen to species in the modern world. With greater technological equipment, like for deforestation, the rate would increase dramatically. Instead, technology should be used to help preserve animals, by preserving their habitats, including using carbon capture climate services; or, when buying wood products, always look for an FSC logo to make sure the wood isn’t from illegal logging. Maintaining a good biodiversity also allows us to keep genetic reservoirs open, keeping the crops qualitative, for uses like medicines. (Why Save Endangered Species)Conclusion99% of all species that have ever lived are now extinct. (“Marking World wildlife day”) Extinction may be a natural process, but the accelerating decline of wild animals today are all generally a direct result of human activities, yet not everyone is willing to take responsibilities towards their consequences.My viewpoint on this issue when writing the research has never changed – the only thing that has changed is the realisation of how urgent it is to take action as quickly as possible. I think the essential knowledge that everyone should understand is that humans are the only ones with power to get species off the endangered list. The starting point can be with government agencies dedicated to conservation, to implement policies designed to protect them. Preservation of the wildlife calls for efforts to boost conservation of the whole ecosystem and its delicate functioning, meaning saving endangered species could indirectly help the environment.This calls for nations to consider different countries’ approach towards this issue, which I think Indonesia’s approach should be looked upon as an example- focusing upon raising moral awarenesses and to inspire people to understanding the values and beauty of nature. I think that if MEDCs would follow a similar approach, the rate of species going endangered would most likely decrease, as they have a stronger political and economical power to control it’s nation, and perhaps to persuade other nations too.I believe every creature has intrinsic value and a right to exist, just as if human species do. The wildlife serves an ecological, educational, historical, recreational and scientific value to the Nation and its people. Nature is a precious gift and should be preserved for the future generation – species going endangered is a message from Nature to warn us that she needs our help, that we should stop ruining it. This is why, we should use all the power we have, all the time we have (approximately only about 10 years left!), to prevent a potential catastrophe from happening – Earth transforming into a desolated dryland, humans as the only life left on the planet. The preservation of endangered species would not only bring save species from extinction, but also offers opportunity to protect our only home. It is necessary to protect the wildlife.The sources I chose for this research paper is valid towards my topic, as they are all quite current and relevant. Sometimes it was challenging to keep a neutral point of view when looking at biased sources, but I think it is necessary to consider at them as they sometimes give good reasoning along with their points. I only chose to use a small percentage of the many websites I looked through, despite giving good points, some did not provide enough references, and some are merely just their own opinions without evidence. This is also a new skill that I have picked up, which is useful for me in the future to interpret different sources, especially since there has been issues of “fake news” around the media recently.