Doug, very few of us have anything against the idea of having somebody go thin out the woods, take out slash, remove small trees, etc. It may also be possible that somebody might be able to do that and make a profit.

What bothers me, and I think most others, is the idea of paying people in the timber industry for their services by removing restrictions, which we regard as necessary, to compensate them for their trouble.

And I would think that as a believer in low taxation, you would agree. Because logging in this country has become just another form of subsidized corporate welfare. The royalties paid to the government for logging on federal lands are insufficient to compensate the taxpayer for roadbuilding and other services provided by the BLM. It that really what conservative principles require? I think I might become a conservative, if I thought there were actually conservative principles. But it is my impression that the term "conservative" has come to mean only that rich people should have more money, and poor people should have less. Am I wrong? Is there anything more to it than that? If so, what is it?

And yes, I have voted Republican. I voted for a Mr. Bagley once, for Controller!