While California’s salmon woes are well documented, the TruthOut blog suggests the Governor is misrepresenting the issue, suggesting an attempt to morph the issue into a “fish or jobs” conundrum.

This is not an issue of “fish versus people versus fish,” nor “fish versus jobs.” The battle to save the Delta, the largest estuary on the West Coast of the Americas, really comes down to a conflict between a future based on sustainable fishing, farming and recreation or a future based on corporate agribusiness irrigating toxic, drainage-impaired land that should never have been farmed at the expense of Delta and Sacramento Valley farms and healthy fisheries.

That music to angler’s ears of course, but since fish can’t vote its been pointless to argue the merits of a vibrant and sustainable fishery. 300 million dollars in federal relief for west coast salmon fisherman suggests it’s a “jobs versus jobs” struggle – with the only question being which to preserve, farmers or the recreational kind.

The highest amounts of sales generated by the commercial fishing industry were in California ($9.8 billion)..

The value for all the crops grown in California was $4.19 billion. Do the math, people.

Add in the $1.9 billion in tackle sales and the 23000 jobs associated with those purchases and the story starts getting lopsided.

Is the cost of destroying the thousands of jobs provided to the economy by California and Oregon fisheries, the tourist industry, and Delta and Sacramento Valley farms worth providing subsidized water to corporate agribusiness to irrigate toxic, drainage-impaired land on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley?

I’d take the time to read the piece – the only statistic it’s lacking is the number of jobs tied to keeping all those palatial lawns green with our precious water …