The article “20,000 Species Are Near Extinction: Is it Time to Rethink How We Decide Which to Save?” from the online website, National Geographic, informs about the importance of conserving species that are starting or continuing to disappear. The author, Christine Dell’Amore, explains the difficulty conservationists are having at choosing which plants and animals should be protected. The issue lies in whether choosing the popular animals, such as panda bears and lions, or preserving the usually forgotten species such as insects and fish. The point is also made that some of the forgotten species are sometimes the most important to process on earth, such as ants and honey bees. This is why many conservationists believe that saving the less populated and popular species are the most important first, especially since they have lesser numbers than the more popular ones. …show more content…
On one side, Dell’Amore explains how most conservationists believe that protection now should come to those species whom are important part of some of earth processes or are of lesser numbers on earth. This side believes that people are not thinking of protect those species they do not deem as cute or fluffy. For example, the article says that ants are brought up as being important environmental helpers, but because people do not think of ants as cute and fully like a monkey or a panda, ants are not protected as they should be. The other side believes that saving the bigger, more populated species can take care of numerous species at one time and they do not only focus on the cute, fluffy animals. For example, in the article Eric Dinerstein from the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) states that because the WWF helps protect the larger species, many other species of smaller population have a chance also to thrive. Both sides have merit, but all species are important, whether popular and populated or