"Kangaroos in the firing line"

Another news clipping, in a very obscure corner of the newspaper. Why do I choose to comment on articles like this? Probably because it affects me and I am hapless as I can only take the easy way - to write about it rather than raise my voice of protest on the streets with hep placards and slogans. I am not for that! Excuse me, please. Well, the news item was about how the officials in Canberra want to reduce the kangaroo population by shooting them in regular culls. Atrocious. Well, humans always seem to take it for granted that every place, space and other aspects are the sole propriety of theirs and any non human that interfer es with this is tried to be eliminated. At this point, I stop to think about the kangaroo's thought process (I do not know if the non human world thinks, but if it does, this is what I presume it to be). It might think about the many humans everywhere, destroying all its habitats, and think of a way of reducing the human population drastically. Being at the top of the food chain (there are scientists who say that the cannibals are at the top of the food chain, buts for now lets presume that humans who are not essentially cannibals occupy the priced top position of the food chain) does not give man the authority to decide about the non human world. Now, you may argue that since we are endowed with the power of thinking, we can very well 'think' for the non human species too! But, are we justified here.
The philosophy of Deep Ecology propagated by Arne Naess, who passed on recently (Jan 12th 2009) talks about the intrinsic worth of every organism, be it a small worm, a grizzly bear or a mountain. Well, if the kangaroo possesses an intrinsic worth in itself, who are we to control their population by shooting them or slow poisoning the species. Can the governement (any government) force sterlising the human males of the country once they have fathered a kid? (Here, I am imagining officials roaming around places and as soon as a child is born in a household, drag the man and force sterlisation as a method to keep the population in check). Well, this will never ever happen, for man is seen as a highly evolved organism, who is regarded in high esteem. Well, I wish all of them could read 'Animal Farm' by George Orwell, though the book is not a very great example of the thought process I am affecting in this post, it is a beginning, nevertheless.
The poor kangaroos will not even know that they are going to be shot at. They will innocently hop into the shooting range and will be dead. If that is not sufficient, after their death, the officials will not even give them a decent burial but will take the opportunity to use their hide and sell it for the 'economy' of the country. When will we cease seeing animals as 'economy' improving assets. Can the non human world be seen as organisms who should exist for their intrinsic worth rather than their tourist attraction, their skin, their bones et al.
Reader, I am justified by seeing them for what they are rather than as for what they can be useful to us (humans).