The accusation
"Helping wild animals is anthropocentric. It forces human values on them, assuming they value the same things we do."
The answer
The goal of the proposal is to prevent things that really harm animals: suffering and early death. That isn't a value only humans have.
A hungry animal looks for food. An injured animal avoids moving. A cold animal looks for shelter. They clearly don't want to suffer.
Animals have no interest in having their suffering and death maximized just so that "nature can take its course."
"Humans are the ones deciding"
Someone might say: "But in the end, humans are the ones deciding what happens to the animals." That's true, but it happens either way. When humans decide not to help, they're deciding too. The point is to decide with the animals' good in mind.
In short
- The proposal aims to prevent suffering and death, which harm any animal.
- Animals have no interest in suffering so that nature can take its course.
- Humans decide either way; it's better to decide for the animals' good.