Human and Animal Equality

I believe that Kant is wrong in the notion that animals do not have any intrinsic value, but only value because we as humans deem it so. He argues that since we are "rational beings" we hold higher precedence over "lower" creatures.
I find this to be false in that I believe all animal life has equal value to human life. To say that since we are thinking, reasoning beings qualifies us to have some greater importance than animals is not logical reasoning in my opinion. Kant gives the example of an owner who shoots his dog does not fail in his responsibilities to the dog, for it cannot judge, but rather fails in his duty to humanity (by acting cruelly). I do not see the difference in value between the dog and a human in this example. If we as reasoning beings judge that cruelty to animals by humans directly relates to one’s losing or failing humanity then shouldn’t that action of cruelty be stopped? In that sense, there really is no distinction between whether negative actions are directed against humans or animal, only that it results in the same degradation of humanity. I must say that I believe that killing of animals, in a non-sadistic ways is permissible for humans. Not for any reason other than that they provide sources of food, and a means to survival for humans. I do not see this as degrading to humanity in any way as long as it is done in a respectful manner, such as the Native Americans did, which realizes that animal life serves as a cornerstone of human survival.