I believe there's nothing wrong with being interested in the environment and its improvement, but there is something wrong with a moral code that denigrates human beings.
You see, morality only exists BECAUSE of human beings. And the nature of humans is that we don't have innate knowledge or automatic instincts as other animals do. In fact, humans have to LEARN how to live and how to make choices. And THAT'S what a moral code is for, or SHOULD BE for, anyway -- as a guide to making good choices. And human life and human happiness are the cause and purpose of morality in the first place.
Certainly, destroying the environment is BAD for human life and human happiness, but humans just being humans and living peaceful, productive, non-coercive, non-violent lives should not be construed to be bad (for the environment or anything else) in and of themselves. You can't judge something to be good or bad WITHOUT considering humans and what they require; that would be committing the fallacy of the "stolen concept" (using a concept to sabotage itself, deny itself or even destroy itself), and actually would be fundamentally silly if not, as it is in this case, evil.
"What is morality? It is a code of values to guide man's choices and actions -- the choices which determine the purpose and the course of his life. It is a code by means of which he judges what is right or wrong, good or evil." -- Ayn Rand in "Faith and Force: the Destroyers of the Modern World"
|Also see: Who Will Defend Industry from Eco-Terrorism?|