While I voted yes, what I really needed to say was "it should be".  Does just saying something is a human right when it is patently not being treated a such make it so?

At what point is it a right to have water and at what point do we say this area doesn't have enough water to support life.

DO we support life even when the habitat is incompatible with life.

Animals would move to a better area.  Should not people too?