Animal poaching occurs when an animal is killed illegally. It usually occurs when an animal has something that is considered valuable. This is a big problem right now, especially because it is causing many animals to become extinct or endangered. As of May 2019, 1 million plants and animals are at risk of extinction due to humans (poaching, pollution, global warming, etc.). Some people see animal poaching as a way to control animal overpopulation and save the earth for other things that benefit us financially, but they only use it as a disguise to sell them on the black market and gain personal wealth. Several articles explain both sides, I found sources from National Geo, outsideonline, articles.aplus and CBS. Animal poaching is equivalent to killing a person. It is still a form of life and poses no threat to us. It would be different if you were defending yourself from an attack. People aren't hunted for sport, so animals shouldn't be either. Food chains are what take care of all this, but animal poaching interferes with this. They are killing both predators and prey, which causes an imbalance, so I say stop. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay In the first article, Wes Siler basically states that there are two main considerations that add to the shrinking of elephant masses, poaching and environmental misfortune. It is estimated that illegal ivory trading could be worth up to $1 billion each year and that up to 23,000 elephants are poached each year. This is surprising and dangerous, but the greatest danger elephants and other enormous creatures face comes from ever-increasing human progress, cities, roads and the agricultural sector destroying their living space. Individuals who depend on the cultivation and raising of dairy cattle are worth the land and the crops grown on it. Which implies that elephants grazing that land pose a risk to businesses. Hunting wild game, oddly enough, can neutralize both the misfortune of the natural environment and poaching, giving elephants real economic value. Elephant hunting costs a huge amount of dollars; that benefit diverts creatures from an irritation to a meaningful product. If a landowner benefits more from hunting elephants than from raising steers, he will allow more elephants to remain wild and will also have the motivating force to protect the animals from poaching. Many landowners where elephants are persecuted have contracted with security groups equipped to protect the animals from poachers. Now, to contrast, Lisa Winter's article explains that every healthy biological system is adapted to natural lifestyle. If a predator is pushed out of the picture, the creatures it normally feeds on will increase their numbers at an unsustainable rate. When this happens, life forms lower in the evolved lifestyle can be eliminated, affecting vegetation, with the risk of causing avalanches, disintegration, or unwanted soil. When the environment is thrown into confusion, other animals and even people in the area will feel the effects as it becomes more avid for them to grow or search for food. The wild rescue officers paid to ensure these creatures carry out an incredibly risky business, with many dedicated workers slaughtered by poachers every year. TOmany officials are essentially not given the tools necessary to carry out their responsibilities well, which is a big problem, considering how huge the parks are and how cruel the climate can be. The lack of spending plans means they don't consistently receive proper boots and other hardware or don't have experience in a large enough organization to best protect the animals. Although some parks use drifts and other innovative methods to track and stop poachers, all officers should be given the most obvious opportunity for success. While it may seem almost reasonable that some have become nervous enough to turn to poaching for a payday, it's better for the local economy if these creatures are kept alive. Parks with thriving animal populations may attract many more visitors, which will require enlisting more local people. For example, an elephant killed for its tusks will bring in around $21,000, but if the same elephant were kept alive and was part of an ecotourism interest, it could bring in over $1.6 million over its lifetime. This means that it is many times more rewarding to catch an elephant than to kill it. Many animals are poached due to a confusing belief in some regions that a particular piece of an animal, such as a rhino's horn or tiger's bristles, has unique healing properties that can be a sexual enhancer or even a remedy for cancer. Obviously, there is no logical evidence to support any of these cases, implying that these creatures are destined for eradication without any explanation. Elephant tusks and skins are simply ornamental, which is a very bad reason why there is also a growing danger to protect animals that focus on their meat. Bushmeat, as it is known, can occur on protected land, using illegal strategies and draining animals in extremely unsustainable ways. Progressives are trying to offer alternatives to bushmeat, allowing everyone to be supported, while still safeguarding the animals. In conclusion, he goes on to state that poaching is the result of human interest, period. Once there is no longer a business opportunity for these creature parts, the killings will stop. While it's a good idea to donate money to conservation groups like WildAid or protected parks like Virunga National Park in the Democratic Republic of Congo, there are also other things anyone can do. I would have to agree with Lisa though Silers had valid points; Animal poaching is equivalent to killing a person. It is still a form of life and does not represent a threat to us, it would be different if you defended yourself from an attack. People aren't hunted for sport, so animals shouldn't be either. Food chains are what take care of all this, but animal poaching interferes with this. They are killing both predators and prey, which causes an imbalance, so I say stop. It seems like the government controls everything we do, so if overpopulation was a problem, then there is a better way to care for animals. Like puts them in a place to be seen, as Winter said is more beneficial than simply killing them when they are put on display. They also don't make the process quick for animals, especially elephants. I've seen commercials of elephants being brutally killed, chased with burning rocks, burned alive, etc. Which is unethical because it can't be done to a human being but since it's not us, they are made into targets as a sport.