Natural extinction

I've been thinking... while not the oldest by far, we're still a long-lived species, and inevitably we're going to see other species die in our time. While I definitely agree that we should try not to kill other species accidentally, I wonder if anyone considers whether we're saving species that were simply destined to die off?

Does anyone know about research into this? Comments in general?

I'd say that trying to prevent extinction of animals even when we are not involved with their low population in the first place (even though we almost always are) is the right thing to do, even if it is 'playing God'. I don't think anybody can come up with a reasonable argument towards us letting entire species die out when we have the ability to stop it from happening.

The next great paradigm shift is the destruction of our race.

>>2
What if an endangered species, under protection, makes a rebound and repopulates; then, they consume most if not all of some food resource, starving another species like a weed? In this way, saving a species may be as bad as killing the other.

We've already seen the kind of havoc we can wreak by introducing non-native species' to an area.

>>3

nah, the next great paradigm shift is that we get such a good bead on genetics and nature that we stick around until the universe goes 'haywire' one way or another, and then figure out a way to cope with that.