Then there might be a chance the animal might be able to get off of the endangered list.
It would put other animals at risk of extinction because the food chain is a delicate balance between life and death and it is important it stays the way it is.
yes we can live without disturbing the food chain. all animals are directly or indirectly dependent on the food chain
specifically in the food chain? first group of animals are mostly grass fed so, carnivores will have nothing to eat and will be hungry. and this leads to imbalance of food chain, which leads to death and extinction.
the whole food chain would be destroyed
you would die
Yes it is bad for animals to be endangered. Animal's need other animals to survive. Even mosquito's need to live. Frogs would die without them. -All animals including humans are part of a very delegate food chain. when one of more disappears those animals they feed on become over run, animals that fed on the endangered species could themselves die out
they get eaten up by bigger animals
Then its food chain would be interrupted, and whatever normally feeds on it would die, and what ever feeds on that would die until finally everything up the food chain died. The animals or microorganisms that got eaten by the animals that were removed and would thrive until they used up all their resources and then the majority of the population would die. Really, it's a lose-lose situation.
the food chain will collapse and the world will be in chaos within 24 hours
The rest of the food chain would collapse and there would be lots of deaths from starvation.
Animals don't typically have 'problems' as we humans have problems. There are no endangered species breeding on Antarctica's beaches, and the food chain among the animals means that some animals are consumed by other animals as food.
No animal lives on the Antarctic continent: it's too cold and there is no food chain. Of the sea animals that breed on Antarctica's coasts, none are listed as endangered.
never do