DougE, I'll admit these numbers cause me some concern. I was delaying my response to DD till I asked the PGC if this new density goal is based on the old "forested square mile" or if its now on total square miles. The reference to the old "forested square mile" is conpicuously absent in the entire report. It was almost always in the previous studies and press releases. I have had enough of DD's double talk and inserting his own interpretations as "fact" and wasn't going to answer him till I checked on that. You, however, have not played that game so I'll ask if you're sure this is simply a new density goal without any other change in parameters. If it is, I am concerned, but still not quite ready to second guess those that do this for a living.

DD gloat if you wish. You still have no credibility here even though I may have to stand corrected by you on this particluar point. Your continued editorializing and bombardment with self made or self interpereted "facts" makes your opinion worthless to most of us. I may have missed something out there but I have not made up or twisted any facts to make my point. You, sir, have done that over and over ad nauseum.