This is bullshit. We've been diverting some water flow each year to safeguard a population of what used to be thousands of spawning fish. But as the fish population has come under greater and greater pressure, the population of the fish species in question has fallen to 6, so for all practical purposes it has now gone instincts EDIT extinct (sorry) while people have been arguing over how little water it can get by with.

Stop over-simplifying complex issues. It doesn't help anyone.

I looked up and did the conversions because I had no idea what a foot acre was. I thought other folks would be interested as well. I expressed no opinion on whether it was a worthwhile endeavor one way or another.

I'm personally not a fan of the 1.1 trillion gallons used for almonds while they pull water off restaurant tables (yeah, that'll work), but I didn't think that had any place here either.

BTW I'm sorry for my tone, I can see you were trying to contribute to the discussion. But as you can guess, this is an issue I care about and I have felt quite frustrated with simplistic comaprisons like gallons-per-fish that make for eye-catching statistics but don't really aid understanding of the situation. I didn't mean to suggest you were being dishonest and am sorry that I went off on you as I did.

The population of this fish hasn't fallen to 6. This is about 6 instances of a particular fish, not the final 6 instances. I am interested in the outrage over wind power in California. The Condor is killed by windmills, yet the environmentalists keep demanding windmills. Environmental groups like the Sierra Club would bulldoze a city to save a endangered rat but say nothing about the danger of windmills.