Can you say, "2002 Klamath fish kill?"

If you recall, an estimated 30,000-40,000 chinook perished because the administration thought irrigators needed that water more than the fish did. I'd have to say that 30,000-40,000 fits the description of "wholesale destruction" pretty damned well.

As I recall, that run was considered "healthy" (ie not in need of ESA-listing). I guarantee we can only expect more of the same "wild-salmon-take-a-back-seat-to-industry" approach if endangered runs are de-listed as a result of the H = W policy.