That's true, Doc. Ultimately, our standards of living are not sustainable, and there's absolutely zero chance people will be willing to make the sacrifices necessary to meaningfully restore salmon (or any other) habitat. Too many people make too much money and enjoy too much convenience from continuing development for that to be a realistic notion.

The big problem I have with pointing at habitat as the be all, end all is that the hopelessness of the situation is used as moral justification to continue the management practices that are expediting the extinction process, one irresponsible allocation at a time.

Cedarholm said salmon themselves are habitat, and I believe he was right. How about we quit killing everything that does survive to adulthood, to get the maximum survival benefit from the habitat that remains? Nah! Killing salmon means money, which supports more unsustainable lifestyles. Let's roll with that instead.