Biodiversity article response

The human race have caused much damage to the environment and biodiversity. For example, three types of vulture populations were injured because of diclofenac, an anti-inflammatory drug which were soon found to cause renal problems in these vultures. Because of this, the dead bodies of cows that the vultures ate were eaten by the wild dogs, causing that population to increase dramatically, also making the chance of rabies being transferred greater. Therefore, the lives of the millions of people that were affected by rabies almost directly linked to the declining vulture population. This sequence is probably likelier to get the public's attention than the one of ethics. Our material need and our survival is higher than our sympathies for other species. We have drive off human tribes from the land to keep it "natural", not thinking that we may have been part of a natural cycle of things that was interrupted by our disappearance. "Hot spots" and "biodiversity" aren't popular choices for words because they often draw negative auras. In fact, 30% of the US population don't know what the word "biodiversity" means. That's 90,660,000 people in the United States. Many people can appreciate the value of nature as a collection of resources, perfectly captured in Paul Ehrlic's term "environmental practices". We need to throw out the stereotype that the conservation of nature and the preservation of the human race cannot mix because that is exactly what we need to do to survive and help nature survive with us.