Read this argument. If you didn't understand, then read it again. Then read about the philosophy in ethics...Widen your views and minds. The fact that a hundred percent of the people here actually find no ethical/moral obligation about this question/issue is truly disturbing. Here is why..
The genocide of any species is not "ETHICAL" in any sense. Every species should have the right to live and thrive despite the fact that some might cause diseases or even death to others. To say that” it is, in fact, ETHICAL to commit a genocide”, is highly immoral and un-ethical. Saying such a thing about other species indicates and reinforces our “god complex” arrogance that, undeniably, shows how us (humans) are species that think and believe we are beings of high order/divine and deserve the right for life even on the expense of another specie(s). This typical thought and understanding about ourselves and the beings around us are reinforced by religion and culture. And it is widely wrong!
We live AMONGEST those species and NOT ABOVE them!
Now, to say that “committing such a genocide is NECESSARY for our survival” then that would be a reasonable argument to commit to. The natural order is all about survival ship. The nature of survival-ship doesn’t recognize/acknowledge things such as “morals” and “ethics” and it only operates on a fitness principle. Thus genocide of that species for our survival instead of theirs would be reasonable.