could finish.

This subject deserves much more discussion than we can probably give it on this board. Who am I to say that we should protect one species and not another? I am nobody, and that is why I am not in charge of making those decisions.

There are approximately 16,306 species currently listed as endangered. IMO I do not believe that there is a single one of those species that, if became extinct, would trigger a massive path of extinction to other species behind it. Even if we let all 16,306 species die off, I do not believe that it would trigger the end of the world for mankind.

With that said, I do believe that we have a responsibility to do what we can to conserve. 16k is a large amount of species facing extinction. And we have a limited amount of time, resources and money to help them all. Because of those limits I believe that we need to pick our battles and focus those resources. This means letting some species naturally die off.

What are the criteria of determining if a species is to receive aide or not? The answer to that is well above my pay grade.

It is just my opinion but I would rather see those resources go towards saving more majestic creatures such as elephants, tigers, panthers, and rhinos, rather than saving the Pacific Pocket Mouse. And yes I get that my opinion of a majestic creature is different from the next guy's. I'll bet you can find a couple people who find the Pacific Pocket Mouse majestic.