No, because I would be satisfied with my creation as I assume God must be.
Now if you are asking if I could change existence, how would I? I would say in no way because, again, I assume God is satisfied with his creation.
If "God" exists (and I believe he does) I don't presume to understand all the workings of his creation and except for minor changes like a few more horses or penguins, I would hope I wouldn't try to screw with it.
Eating is a great way to recycle energy. Plants grow in soil that has been fertilized by the decaying matter of formerly living organisms, so without death, sunlight and water alone won't sustain them (or at least not most of them. I'm no botanist)
It might be nice if all life that is killed and eaten felt no pain, but then they wouldn't survive long before they ended up killing themselves by accident.
People with a childlike notion of what God must be in order to truly be "God" very often point to human suffering as proof he can't possibly exist.
Perhaps they include the suffering of other organisms, but I don't think I've ever seen any of them express that. Apparently, the suffering of an infant zebra ripped apart by hyenas only minutes after it's born is just another element of the wonderful world of evolutionary based Nature.
In my experience the people who posit that human suffering is proof God doesn't exist are most often also those who tend to rant about human arrogance. Ironic.
(Note: I fully accept evolution.)
It's up to each individual to determine what they believe in terms of the origin of the universe. As long as they don't mock my beliefs or try to force theirs on me, I'm good.