Man and "Environment" Can Coexist

I was struck by forest ecology supervisor Craig Iverson's statement in an article in the May 10, 2010 Pensacola News Journal (www.pnj.com, Coldwater Creek Feels the Burn). The statement had to do with the demise of a woodpecker species during the 1970's, '80's and 90's. The woodpecker species was disappearing because "there was too much brushy understory in Blackwater. We were not burning enough."

Disclaimer; I know Craig Iverson and he is a very intelligent man. My entry here is no indictment of him or his statement.

What struck me about the statement was that we've been told for years (by those purporting to protect the environment/earth) how man is "destroying the environment." We are threatening the habitat of numerous species. To listen to the reports it often sounds as if the planet would somehow be better off without mankind.

So I ask the following;
1. How arrogant must we humans be if we think that we have the power to destroy the earth? Think about that. If you believe in God, you've got to believe that He wouldn't give us the power to destroy His creation. If you believe the earth is greater than us mere mortals, how could you possibly believe we would have power over the earth?
2. What if we didn't protect some of the many "protected" species? Many other countries put no such restrictions on themselves. What would happen? Would new species be created?
3. How much money do we spend every year to "protect" species that have no apparent value to the environment?
4. Isn't man part of nature? If the lion is part of nature and eats when it wants (killing its prey with no regard for the endagerment of a species), why does man have to worry about preserving certain species (other than to maintain a food supply)?

Just for the record; I don't support the senseless killing of various species for no reason. I'm just asking questions.

I say; we can coexist, but we humans are higher on the food chain than the animals and plant life. What do you think?