Whatever, Mike. I'm tired of arguing. You talk about science, but the results of data can't be applied in a vacuum. An example of that is the levy systems in this country. Look at New Orleans, the levies have done things for the city, but they have helped destroy the natural wetland barriers and made hurricane damage even worse. My problem all along has been your refusal to let what you yourself have called a minor issue be one that developers can come to different conclusions about. You're not a scientist, you're an ideologue. Big difference.

>It was you that - pardon me if I interpreted it wrong - but IMO rudely said "Enough said" at one point. This to me seemed to indicate that you are unwilling to have a discussion about what is BEST because you've already closed your mind by accepting what simply works for you and your environment.