I completely disagree with the aforementioned assertion. I firmly believe that other species, which are classified by taxonomy into other categories such multicellular animals, fungi, and plants, are necessary for human survival. If we weren't able to hunt animals, which helps to increase and feed the human population, we as humans could not possibly survive.
While it is true that we can cultivate crops like fruits and vegetables, these same crops cannot give us the critical proteins that we get from beef, chicken, and pork. The existence of a food chain in the world is because some other animals rely on other animals for their survival; this brings a similarity with human beings. This cycle revolves between human beings and animals.
My thought is that if animals would perish human beings would shortly or later pass away as well. Besides some other organisms rely on human beings for survival and would follow in the outfit if we go defunct (Bell, 2012). The only outcome that would come to play is the butterfly effect, and this result is part of the cycle of life. We would not be here if we were not meant to exist.
All other organisms which survive off human beings will be affected if human beings perish. Undernourishment, overpopulation, and diseases, are caused by a ferocious cycle, no benefit could result out of it (Bell, 2012). If we could be as smart as we are when the dinosaurs use to exist, they may still be here in our Jurassic Park. We and other organisms need each other to survive.
References
Bell, E. M. (2012). Life at extremes: Environments, organisms, and strategies for survival. Wallingford: CABI.
