Jerboas: Value and Essay

“Should we Save the Jerboas” by Peter Cave is an essay with some mistakes. On the essay he does an excellent job arguing about the survival of the nearly extinct Jerboa. From time to time he starts talking about a different topic and then he finds a way to get back on the extinction of Jerboas. He did a good on explaining his main topics, and he added a couple of sentences that shouldn’t be presented on his essay. For example, when Peter Cave says, “The stopping point is often happiness, usually human happiness.”
On paragraph seven he mentions, “Philosophizing, arguable, is intrinsically valuable, yet may also possess instrumental value in brining peace and harmony to the universe”. How can he start talking about philosophy when the essay is about the extinction of Jerboas? Since he jumped into a different topic I feel like he didn’t organize his topics well. He should just stick to one subject and not bounce to different subjects, because the reader can easily get confused. He needs to be more cautious about what he includes in his essay, because when he adds different topics he is losing his credibility.
He adds plenty of extra information from the beginning to end of his essay. Some which is important for the reader to know and the other which should not even be included. I think he didn’t intentionally meant to add so much information, but when he does this he loses more of his credibility towards his readers. Using to much information can actually be boring to the reader and sometimes the reader can lose interest in reading the essay.
Through-out the entire first paragraph and some of the second paragraph he constantly tells the reader the Jerboa has enormous ears. Probably by the time the reader gets to the second paragraph he or she is probably already tired of hearing about the Jerboa’s ears. When he is constantly repeating and reminding us about the Jerboas ears I feel like he is using this repetition to fill his essay. When he is continuously