Lens re-shuffle

Yet again it seems... Anyway, I'm finding more and more that my lenses just sit there as I don't get much opportunity to get out and use them...
So basically I was thinking of selling off my 70-200 and the 300mm f/4 and buying instead a 24-105mm IS for a walk-about lens and some landscape'ish photog.
Then if I feel I want to move back into wildlife I'll get either a 70-300mm IS or a 100-400mm IS
I bought the 300mm prime and loved it but think a zoom would give more flexibility and wouldn't suffer much image loss tbh.
I know that pro's notice a difference but, well lol I think I'll be safe
I thought about the 70-300 IS but am not convinced... would be more compact etc. but obviously the 100-400 is a better lens... but how much better? Is it worth the price diff?

So I guess my question would be does this sound like a wise move, or will I just regret selling my lovely whites... It's just I'd like the 24-105 for a walk about and would need to sell at least the 70-200 2.8, and might as well trade the 300 prime for a 100-400 zoom for more flexible wildlife... no point in having both is there... or is there?

Bit of a waffle here but I'm on lunch break so seemed a good idea lol- any opinions of personal experiences would be most welcome- I'm pretty sure I saw the 100-400mm voted best all round wildlife lens...

Thanks for any help,
Sincerely,

Richard

24mm isn't very wide on a crop. I really like the 17-50 as a walk-around lens. That and a 100-400 would be pretty similar in price to your 70-200 + 300.

If they're just sitiitng there, replace them with something that you will use.

It sounds like you're looking for inspiration as opposed to a known need. Nothing wrong with losing interest in photography. People lose interest all the time. It might be just as you said, not much oppoertunity to get out and shoot.

The least amount of damage, imo, would be to sell the 300 and buy the 24-105. You could later decide what to do about the 70-200, if anything.