Dave Barry, who is a hero of mine has said, “If God had wanted us to be concerned for the plight of the toads, he would have made them cute and furry.”

I am assuming that those words are part of some humor column he wrote about endangered species. There are a lot of people who know more than I do about species and such, but worrying about some of them (not the people) is just beyond my realm of concern except for when I accidentally step on one, in which case concern is hardly a strong enough descriptor.

Yes, it's hard to register alarm when we are talking about the possible disappearance of toads, snakes, bats, or anything with rodent or spider in its name, scientific or otherwise.

Getting excited about prairie dogs and desert ragweed is difficult too.

I did a little research and read that many ecosystems are delicately balanced and the endangerment of one species can effect many others in the same environment. In fact the biggest concern is that since humans and wildlife inhabit the same natural environments, it is important that the balance be maintained for the good of humans.

All this time, I thought that environmentalists were altruistic in their desires to protect species and that they were being protected for their own sakes. Silly me.

Although species become extinct as a natural occurrence, we should be concerned when they are helped along by the activities of humans.

Okay, which is it? Are humans the good guys or the bad guys here?

For myself, I am perfectly willing to get along with the grizzly bear, the gray wolf and for that matter, the black-footed ferret. In fact I have a suggestion for preserving their native habitat which I think is somewhere in the mountains. Simply post signs that say, “Caution, grizzly bears live here.” Nine tenths of us would gladly turn around and go home, or at least camp a hundred miles away. The one tenth who persist in hanging around would probably be the kind who leave no trace for one reason or another anyway.

One reason for preserving every species is that they might be useful to us someday. Fifty percent of prescription medications have active ingredients that come from plants or animals. However, by my count, fifty percent of plants are classified as weeds or are the kinds of plants that make us take prescriptions.

In fact, most of the plant species have not been studied sufficiently to determine what they are good for. Similarly, the complete nature of the relationships of most all of the of the species to each other and their habitats is not clearly understood. I suppose a good share of the mitigation programs involve some guesswork.

It's sort of like messing with the economy. Is endangering the housing market going to topple the world's economy? Probably not if we are busy counting fish instead of beans.

Perhaps the next question is whether protecting a fish or a plant is going to endanger a widespread economy? Or does anyone really know?