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. Use specific reasons and examples to support your choice?

It is often argued that human beings require more farmland, housing and industry rather than protecting existing species living land. I completely disagree with this opinion and I think it is best to save land for wild life. To begin with, excess usage of land will lead to deforestation which will leads to short age of land for other creatures. Moreover, In recent Times there is rapid industrialization due to this many tress are cutting down, in turn which also causes pollution also effecting the flora and fauna. For instance constructing a dam is essential only but it may cause many acres of area destroyed causing no home for the animals. Thus why, It will be best to use the land which used for general purposes and not to extent. However, another reason for extension of wild life is housing and agriculture lands. Due to rapid population the building of houses and production of foods was increasing rapidly when compared to past two centuries. The needs of peoples are growing up day by day which results to occupying more lands. For example, In china due to large usage of forest for framing and building there is a rare species called dodo which became extent since it does not able to cop with the environment conditions and died results in extension. So, It is good if we provide some land to animals to live their life and to maintain economic balance in the nature. To conclude, I strongly believe that it is best to provide some extent land to species to live to maintain ratio in nature for that we have to limit the usage of resources and reduce cutting down the tress.