In places plagued by guerrilla warfare, nuclear fallout, and chemical weapons, wild animals have rebounded in great numbers on land we have made too polluted—or too dangerous—for human habitation.
. . .
“We’re not saying the radiation levels are good for the animals; we know it damages their DNA, but human habitation and development of the land are worse for wildlife,” [Smith] said.
Places where animals thrive without people:
Literally everywhere on earth before humans were around.
Nobody said if these animals were healthy, just that they survive. Humans could live in the same area, we are just smart/rich enough to leave. Animals don't have the luxury of choice, many don't have the mind or capability to understand that anything is wrong in the first place, they just do what they are built to regardless of what goes on, and a few million years of evolution makes them pretty good at doing what they do.
The best planet will be one with no wildlife, where mankind manages and maintains the status and environment of the entire planet. The only reason we should care about trees, grass, forests, and what-not is their benefit to us.
Human developed land may be more dangerous and bad for wildlife, but that doesn't mean it's a toxic and barren wasteland, it is land filled with humans, that is a good thing. What was once a bunch of squirrels going around doing nothing of worth, eating, dying, contributing nothing to a larger system outside of their reproduction and evolution, we have people who live substantially more deep, complex, and meaningful lives, who build things that will, at the very least ,influence society and help develop a group which builds upon what was built before, rather than starting over every generation.
Fuck nature, fuck animals, humans are better. The only reason we keep it around, that we should try to keep it around, is that it helps us.