I believe what Hursthouse is saying is correct. If you only feel that nature is there to give you something, then you don't have respect for it. When you only care about what something can give you, your acts to help that something in a crisis would be considered less virtuous and disingenuous. When you have wonder and respect for something, your actions to help it in a crisis reflect off of that, proving to be more effective in helping it. This is explained further by the writers of the article, explaining that lacking Hursthouse's new virtues will lead people to overlook moral action and have anthropocentric justifications.