Great post!

This is my first time posting here, and I'm kind of unsure what to do, but I feel I should respond to you in someway, so I'm just gonna type. The result is sure to be an unfocused mess, but with luck maybe you'll find something you'd like to reply to.

Predation problems are I believe a philosophically interesting topic, and I'm always willing to learn more about them. As things stand now, I believe acting to prevent animals from harming others animals is supererogatory. I think it would be difficult to argue that one is blameworthy for failing to help. I'm not exactly sure how even in the future preventing animals from harming others would be obligatory, but then again, as you mention, perhaps technology would connect the can with the ought in such a way that an obligation would result.

Of course, being sentient, suffering does matter in someway to animals, so for them I don't think it's a stretch to say it's a problem, even if they're incapable of conceptualizing it as such. I think it's enough to say that things are worse for them in a meaningful way when they suffer, and better for them when they are free from suffering -- so therefore their suffering is in this way a "problem".

I've never heard it brought up before that getting rid of predators might pose an aesthetic problem. For all the havoc (!) they cause, I'd be quite sad to see, for example, tigers and orcas go, particularly considering the mental capacities of the latter (does eliminating such an intelligent animal pose a moral problem in itself?). Of course this isn't a strong objection, but it's something.

Another somewhat silly issue...if we go far enough into the future, are we assuming space travel is possible? If so, isn't it plausible that considering how big the universe is there must be sentient life on different planets whose welfare we also should be concerned about, provided it's possible to reach these planets? If so, does it become seemingly the endless task of humankind to relieve the suffering of alien life?