I think it is more cruel to make a animal go extink because then you would not have that animal anymore.
The animal doesn't necessarily have to be "missing" however the numbers will be scarce and its habitat affected by either natural or human activity for the species to be considered endangered. For the species to be considered extinct, there would have to be no more evidence to prove the animal's existance.
because when one animal extinct the animal who eats that animal would maybe or absolutely have no other animal to eat so that animal who eat the extincted animal would become extinct then another then another. So maybe all animals may die.
All animals reproduce or they would be extinct.
there would only be plants
One suggestion would be : "Being a More Humane Human." Another would be : "Animal Welfare - It's the Human Thing To Do"
Extinction is the rule, not the exception. That being said, I would not like to be responsible for the extinction of an animal.
no it is not good to kill animal
we would probably be invaded by insects and maby a animal would
At your local animal shelters, like AC&C (Animal Care and Control), the ASPCA (or RSPCA), or the Humane Society.
Many animal shelters do not have a set time limit for holding an animal. But the shelter's available space, the health of the animal, and it's temperament would all be considered as factors that would lead to an animal being destroyed. The Humane Society of the USA recommends that shelters hold stray animals for a minimum of 5 operating days.
It would not procreate (produce offspring), and if it were the last of its species, it would go extinct.
No! That would be a terrible, painful, terrifying way for any animal to die. If you have a sick cat that you know will not get better and want to prevent its suffering, it would be far more humane to take it to the vet to be euthanized.