Detail, east Portland photo, courtesy Miles Hochstein / Portland Ground.

For old times' sake
The bojack bumper sticker -- only $1.50!

To order, click here.

Excellent tunes -- free! And on your browser right now. Just click on Radio Bojack!

E-mail us here.


This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on October 8, 2004 12:13 PM. The previous post in this blog was I still get chills. The next post in this blog is Still neck-and-neck. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.



Law and Taxation
How Appealing
TaxProf Blog
Mauled Again
Tax Appellate Blog
A Taxing Matter
Josh Marquis
Native America, Discovered and Conquered
The Yin Blog
Ernie the Attorney
Above the Law
The Volokh Conspiracy
Going Concern
Bag and Baggage
Wealth Strategies Journal
Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation
World of Work
The Faculty Lounge
Lowering the Bar
OrCon Law

Hap'nin' Guys
Tony Pierce
Parkway Rest Stop
Along the Gradyent
Dwight Jaynes
Bob Borden
Dingleberry Gazette
The Red Electric
Iced Borscht
Jeremy Blachman
Dean's Rhetorical Flourish
Straight White Guy
As Time Goes By
Dave Wagner
Jeff Selis
Alas, a Blog
Scott Hendison
The View Through the Windshield
Appliance Blog
The Bleat

Hap'nin' Gals
My Whim is Law
Lelo in Nopo
Attorney at Large
Linda Kruschke
The Non-Consumer Advocate
10 Steps to Finding Your Happy Place
A Pig of Success
Attorney at Large
Margaret and Helen
Kimberlee Jaynes
Cornelia Seigneur
And Sew It Goes
Mile 73
Rainy Day Thoughts
That Black Girl
Posie Gets Cozy
Cat Eyes
Rhi in Pink
Ragwaters, Bitters, and Blue Ruin
Rose City Journal
Type Like the Wind

Portland and Oregon
Isaac Laquedem
Rantings of a [Censored] Bus Driver
Jeff Mapes
Vintage Portland
The Portlander
South Waterfront
Amanda Fritz
O City Hall Reporters
Guilty Carnivore
Old Town by Larry Norton
The Alaunt
Bend Blogs
Lost Oregon
Cafe Unknown
Tin Zeroes
David's Oregon Picayune
Mark Nelsen's Weather Blog
Travel Oregon Blog
Portland Daily Photo
Portland Building Ads
Portland Food and
Dave Knows Portland
Idaho's Portugal
Alameda Old House History
MLK in Motion

Retired from Blogging
Various Observations...
The Daily E-Mail
Saving James
Portland Freelancer
Furious Nads (b!X)
Izzle Pfaff
The Grich
Kevin Allman
AboutItAll - Oregon
Lost in the Details
Worldwide Pablo
Tales from the Stump
Whitman Boys
Two Pennies
This Stony Planet
1221 SW 4th
I am a Fish
Here Today
What If...?
Superinky Fixations
The Rural Bus Route
Another Blogger
Mikeyman's Computer Treehouse
Portland Housing Blog

Wonderfully Wacky
Dave Barry
Borowitz Report
Stuff White People Like
Worst of the Web

Valuable Time-Wasters
My Gallery of Jacks
Litterbox, On the Prowl
Litterbox, Bag of Bones
Litterbox, Scratch
Ride That Donkey
Singin' Horses
Rally Monkey
Simon Swears
Strong Bad's E-mail

Oregon News
The Oregonian
Portland Tribune
Willamette Week
The Sentinel
Southeast Examiner
Northwest Examiner
Sellwood Bee
Mid-County Memo
Vancouver Voice
Eugene Register-Guard
OPB - Portland
Salem Statesman-Journal
Oregon Capitol News
Portland Business Journal
Daily Journal of Commerce
Oregon Business
Portland Info Net
McMinnville News Register
Lake Oswego Review
The Daily Astorian
Bend Bulletin
Corvallis Gazette-Times
Roseburg News-Review
Medford Mail-Tribune
Ashland Daily Tidings
Newport News-Times
Albany Democrat-Herald
The Eugene Weekly
Portland IndyMedia
The Columbian

The Beatles
Bruce Springsteen
Joni Mitchell
Ella Fitzgerald
Steve Earle
Joe Ely
Stevie Wonder
Lou Rawls

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Friday, October 8, 2004

Maybe on 34

At b!X's suggestion, posted in a comment to my post yesterday on Oregon Ballot Measure 35, I've taken a look at Measure 34, regarding logging in the Tillamook and Clatsop State Forests. Like him (apparently), I can't quite figure out what to do with it.

I start with a general presumption against ballot measures. Although I think they're very useful in case of an emergency, too often they're just the work of some disgruntled group or other that didn't get its way under the normal government processes. They invite us to micromanage from our armchairs matters that are best left to elected officials and professional bureaucrats.

This one has all of those downsides, particularly the micromanagement part. The text of the measure alone is more than two pages long in the voter's pamphlet, filled with mind-numbing details. (And whoever wrote it doesn't know how to operate a computer spell-checker.)

The statements in support and opposition are very well-orchestrated. Although signed by various folks, many of them appear to have been written by a single hand on each side. (I've been offered the "opportunity" to sign ghostwritten voter's pamphlet statements myself, but I've declined.)

As far as I can tell based on the time I've had to look at this, Measure 34 would restrict logging in state forests out by the coast. Among its supporters are my friends David Moskowitz and Frank Amato, two guys who live to fish recreationally. If they're signing on, the measure definitely means a lot less clearcutting on state lands. Among the measure's benefits, they tout the prospect of more high-quality drinking water for human beings, as well as fish habitat.

The opponents include not only timber cutters whose livelihood is threatened but also a slew of local officials out that way who want the revenue that they receive as a result of logging operations in the state forests. They say that if the measure passes, teachers will be laid off, the 9-1-1 center will have less resources at its disposal, etc.

Along with these rational arguments comes the usual raft of emotional stuff. Proponents say that allowing extensive logging breaks a sacred promise that was made when these forests were planted, replacing trees lost in the historic Tillamook burn. Opponents accuse the measure of being sponsored by radical, out-of-state environmental groups.

So what to do? My heart's strongly with the environmentalists, but my process sensibilities tell me they should have fought harder and won this battle in the bureaucratic proceedings. And there is definitely the question of money, or lack thereof, in the state right now.

So to me, it's a standoff so far. Maybe your comments will help me come to a decision.

Comments (14)

Please let me help you.

First of all the opposition to Measure 34 is entirely funded by the timber industry. That should tell you something.

Oregon law requires that our state forests be managed for the "Greatest Permanent Value" of the citizens of Oregon, not just special interests groups. The problem is our laws are too vague and easily manipulated by special interest groups.

The state held public meetings on the current plan but rejected the majority of public comments ((10 to 1 ratio) that favored adding protections for our fish and wildlife habitat as well as our watersheds. The state even rejected scientific comments 11 out of 12 that supported more protections for habitat and to establish permanent reserves.

Unfortunately, the state and timber companies as well as Tillamook County (who all profit from cutting the Tillamook) chose to ignore public and scientific comments and adopt a plan that #1 is experimental and #2 that would log over 85% of the Tillamook and Clatsop State Forests over 25 years.

The legislature also found that the state violated the current timber binge plan by attempting to make a back room deal with the timber industry to increase logging even more- See The Oregonian front page April 10, 2004.

This is a state forest. Voters paid for and replanted the forest following the Tillamook Burn. If it was OK in 1948 to ask voters through the ballot to pay for the restoration of the forest then it seems appropriate today that voters are allowed to weigh in on the question of whether the forest should be managed primarily for timber production or balanced to protect timber jobs and our watersheds and fish and wildlife habitat.

For more information visit

Vote Yes on 34.

Here's what I think is the main sticking point for me: Can someone boil down for me into clear and concise arguments why a locked-in 50/50 approach won't undermine the normal civic processes through which various interests are meant to be balanced?

Unacceptable answer: "Current processes aren't properly balancing those interests." What I'm looking for is an explanation that makes it clear why locking in a specific ratio is the answer, rather than reforming the balancing process is that process is currently broken.

"if that process is currently broken" not "is that process"

Parenthetically, I'm at least glad to see that I'm not the only reasonably intelligent person having trouble deciding on this measure.

One of the things that bothers me about 34 is the panel of experts chosen to make the decisions. The Measure specifies that "the Selection Committee for the Independent Restoration Science Team shall be solely composed of the Biology Department Chairperson from Portland State University, Oregon State University, and the University of Oregon." That selection committee chooses the experts for the committee.

Only one of our universities has a College of Foresty...a group of experts in active forest management versus various types of biological and environmental expertise. OSU has an excellent College of Forestry, but it is separate from the Biology Department, which is under the College of Science.

The Independent Science Restoration Team needs a range of expertise to come up with the best decisions, but this Measure has been written to exclude the experts who specialize in exploiting the forests. Thus, 34 is set up not to give us balanced forest management and preservation, but to give environmentalists a major leg up in preserving far more than half the forests in question.

That's why I can't support 34.

If you visit there is a discussion document on the scientific justification for 50/50.

It is also important to know that this ballot measure is statutory and thus there is some flexibility for the legislature to make changes as new knowledge becomes available to properly balance the values addressed in the measure.

As to the scientific panel - It is apparent from the current plan that science has been replaced with politics. By allowing scientists to recommend the 50% designations we start from a logical premise. These recommendations are then made to the Board of Forestry who must hold public hearings and adopt the recommendations or provide their reasoning for detering from the recommendations. The process is not being circumvented, rather it is enhanced.

I think the basic question that Ballot Measure 34 poses is do voters support balancing timber revenue and logging jobs with protection of our drinking water, fish and wildlife habitat and recreation when managing our state forests? Right now the state favors logging over other uses. Is this how Oregonians want State owned forests managed? Or do they prefer a balance? It's a policy question and as the owners of these state forests, voters have a right to weigh in on this decision.

NO on Everything. Stick with your general presumption. I hate "environmental" measures because they motivate the rural voters a whole lot more than the urban voters and then those voters vote straight Republican tickets. The reason there are almost no rural democratic legislators is because of measures like this one and previous "anti-rural" measures. Use the legislative, administrative, and when necessary, judicial processes to move the environmental agenda forward.


I think the basic question that Ballot Measure 34 poses is do voters support balancing timber revenue and logging jobs with protection of our drinking water, fish and wildlife habitat and recreation when managing our state forests? Right now the state favors logging over other uses. Is this how Oregonians want State owned forests managed? Or do they prefer a balance? It's a policy question and as the owners of these state forests, voters have a right to weigh in on this decision.

See, the problem I have with this is it frames M34 as "this is how to have balance" -- without explaining why it's the only way to have balance. Is there no way "simply" (in quotes because these things are never simple) to fix the current process rather than lock-in a specific ratio that may or may not reflect the needs of reality at some point in the future?

That's still my sticking point, and I don't raise it again because I am unconvincable, but because I still don't see the firm reason why there isn't a way to fix whatever problems the current system has that doesn't involve a locked-in ratio.

b!X, I think yours is a great point.

It is customary for most of the money to fight a measure comes from those who stand to lose the most if the measure passes. But if you look at the public opposition to Measure 34 in the Voter's Pamphlet, you'll find it goes far beyond just the timber industry--including the Oregon Education Association, the Association of Oregon Counties, the Farm Bureau, Democratic lawmakers like Governor Kulongoski and State Senator Joan Dukes, and almost every other elected official in Tillamook and Clatsop Counties.

No matter how well intentioned its sponsors may be, this measure is simply a bad way to make law.

I don't think Measure 34 motivates the conservative right. Bush will. And so will the gay marriage issue. Measure 34 is a middle of the road approach that does not generate the outrage you generally see in environmental fights.

As to who is opposing Measure 34 - The timber compainies have provided 97% of the funding. That should tell you all you need to know. Along with the timber companies and governor teddy k, opposing us in the voters pamphlet, you also have the right wing groups like "Oregonians in Action" anti-land use group and the anti-tax group of Russ Walker, not to mention the pesticide folks. Not generally people I would associate with. But what the hell, teddy k is still looking for his constituents.

The good thing I suppose for those of us that are Kerry supporters - Measure 34 has diverted about $3 million from helping Bush and is being spent against Measure 34. Look for the silver lining.

And no, Measure 34 is not locking anything up. Not the forest or the law. It is a statutory measure, not a constitutional measure. I too use to be opposed to iniatives but after 20 years working with the legislature I find it an option worth considering.

And no, Measure 34 is not locking anything up. Not the forest or the law. It is a statutory measure, not a constitutional measure. I too use to be opposed to iniatives but after 20 years working with the legislature I find it an option worth considering.

I have no opposition to initiatives in and of themselves. But as for this, to say it doesn't lock things in is disingenuous. It may be a statutory change, but using that to suggest that the measure should be supported because the Legislature could just make some changes actually helps make my own point: If there are problems with the current system, then let's fix them in the Legislature starting from where we are now, rather than making a massive and drastic change that then might need to be rolled back.

The argument that this is simply a statutory measure that can be modified by the legislature is disingenuous. As soon as a legislator proposes to change any aspect of a measure passed by the voters, he or she is immediately shouted down by protests that "the voters have spoken!" and "don't thwart the will of the voters!"

Actually you are right. We always end up back at the legislature. But what I do know is public sentiment can move the legislature to do the right thing. And the initiative process is a tool in which to organize public sentiment which in turn can influence the legislature.

What we have seen for years is rollbacks in environmental issues. Even the Dem's have rolled or traded the environment for other important issues because publicly it is not a hot issue. An important issue but it falls short in getting the attention it deserves. Until the public speaks out through a statewide vote I am afraid we will continue to find the environment at the bottom of the barrel when decisions are made.

I hope the public wakes up before there is no clean water left to argue over or wild salmon to save! Will Measure 34 do it? I don't know. I hope it begins to turn the tide.

I'm with everyone who's on the fence. On the one hand, sometimes the only way to get something done is to do it yourself--particularly when the subject at hand is too hot for the legislature to handle. We have a lot of good examples there (bottle bill, death with dignity). But on the other hand, the ballot measure system is mainly useful at doing one clear thing well; too much complexity and you have a tangle of unintended consequences (measure 5).

So what about 50/50. I like the idea. The legislature is incapable of responsible governance at the moment. They're like 8-year-olds locked game of payback; all their energy goes to clever pranks to spring on each other. In this regard, the ballot measure is a breath of fresh air: it tries to balance competing needs and actually ensures timber harvest. That ain't your father's environmental proposal.

There's a certain calculation here for loggers--will they get more with this law than if subsequent ones come down the pike? It seems like a decent solution and one that begins at compromise from both sides.

So then the question is: is it too complex and will it have too many unintended consequences. This, for me, is the big sticking point. I'm extremely conservative with regard to ballot measures for this reason. I'm leaning toward the measure, but I'd hate to see a debacle arise from it's passage. Keep in mind, Portland liberals were the ones who made measure 5 pass.


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Maybe on 34:

» Working, Somewhere, In The Background from The One True b!X's PORTLAND COMMUNIQUE
We do have actual Portland-related content forthcoming, if you were wondering. We have a campaign update that needs posting because there's a week's worth of coverage that needs linking. And since ballots will be mailed next week, our endorsement posts... [Read More]


As a lawyer/blogger, I get
to be a member of:

In Vino Veritas

Lange, Pinot Gris 2015
Kiona, Lemberger 2014
Willamette Valley, Pinot Gris 2015
Aix, Rosé de Provence 2016
Marchigüe, Cabernet 2013
Inazío Irruzola, Getariako Txakolina Rosé 2015
Maso Canali, Pinot Grigio 2015
Campo Viejo, Rioja Reserva 2011
Kirkland, Côtes de Provence Rosé 2016
Cantele, Salice Salentino Reserva 2013
Whispering Angel, Côtes de Provence Rosé 2013
Avissi, Prosecco
Cleto Charli, Lambrusco di Sorbara Secco, Vecchia Modena
Pique Poul, Rosé 2016
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly Rosé 2016
Stoller, Pinot Noir Rosé 2016
Chehalem, Inox Chardonnay 2015
The Four Graces, Pinot Gris 2015
Gascón, Colosal Red 2013
Cardwell Hill, Pinot Gris 2015
L'Ecole No. 41, Merlot 2013
Della Terra, Anonymus
Willamette Valley, Dijon Clone Chardonnay 2013
Wraith, Cabernet, Eidolon Estate 2012
Januik, Red 2015
Tomassi, Valpolicella, Rafaél, 2014
Sharecropper's Pinot Noir 2013
Helix, Pomatia Red Blend 2013
La Espera, Cabernet 2011
Campo Viejo, Rioja Reserva 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2013
Locations, Spanish Red Wine
Locations, Argentinian Red Wine
La Antigua Clásico, Rioja 2011
Shatter, Grenache, Maury 2012
Argyle, Vintage Brut 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #16 Abacela, Fiesta Tempranillo 2014
Benton Hill, Pinot Gris 2015
Primarius, Pinot Gris 2015
Januik, Merlot 2013
Napa Cellars, Cabernet 2013
J. Bookwalter, Protagonist 2012
LAN, Rioja Edicion Limitada 2011
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Rutherford 2009
Denada Cellars, Cabernet, Maipo Valley 2014
Marchigüe, Cabernet, Colchagua Valley 2013
Oberon, Cabernet 2014
Hedges, Red Mountain 2012
Balboa, Rose of Grenache 2015
Ontañón, Rioja Reserva 2015
Three Horse Ranch, Pinot Gris 2014
Archery Summit, Vireton Pinot Gris 2014
Nelms Road, Merlot 2013
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Pinot Gris 2014
Conn Creek, Cabernet, Napa 2012
Conn Creek, Cabernet, Napa 2013
Villa Maria, Sauvignon Blanc 2015
G3, Cabernet 2013
Chateau Smith, Cabernet, Washington State 2014
Abacela, Vintner's Blend #16
Willamette Valley, Rose of Pinot Noir, Whole Clusters 2015
Albero, Bobal Rose 2015
Ca' del Baio Barbaresco Valgrande 2012
Goodfellow, Reserve Pinot Gris, Clover 2014
Lugana, San Benedetto 2014
Wente, Cabernet, Charles Wetmore 2011
La Espera, Cabernet 2011
King Estate, Pinot Gris 2015
Adelsheim, Pinot Gris 2015
Trader Joe's, Pinot Gris, Willamette Valley 2015
La Vite Lucente, Toscana Red 2013
St. Francis, Cabernet, Sonoma 2013
Kendall-Jackson, Pinot Noir, California 2013
Beaulieu, Cabernet, Napa Valley 2013
Erath, Pinot Noir, Estate Selection 2012
Abbot's Table, Columbia Valley 2014
Intrinsic, Cabernet 2014
Oyster Bay, Pinot Noir 2010
Occhipinti, SP68 Bianco 2014
Layer Cake, Shiraz 2013
Desert Wind, Ruah 2011
WillaKenzie, Pinot Gris 2014
Abacela, Fiesta Tempranillo 2013
Des Amis, Rose 2014
Dunham, Trautina 2012
RoxyAnn, Claret 2012
Del Ri, Claret 2012
Stoppa, Emilia, Red 2004
Primarius, Pinot Noir 2013
Domaines Bunan, Bandol Rose 2015
Albero, Bobal Rose 2015
Deer Creek, Pinot Gris 2015
Beaulieu, Rutherford Cabernet 2013
Archery Summit, Vireton Pinot Gris 2014
King Estate, Pinot Gris, Backbone 2014
Oberon, Napa Cabernet 2013
Apaltagua, Envero Carmenere Gran Reserva 2013
Chateau des Arnauds, Cuvee des Capucins 2012
Nine Hats, Red 2013
Benziger, Cabernet, Sonoma 2012
Roxy Ann, Claret 2012
Januik, Merlot 2012
Conundrum, White 2013
St. Francis, Sonoma Cabernet 2012

The Occasional Book

Marc Maron - Waiting for the Punch
Phil Stanford - Rose City Vice
Kenneth R. Feinberg - What is Life Worth?
Kent Haruf - Our Souls at Night
Peter Carey - True History of the Kelly Gang
Suzanne Collins - The Hunger Games
Amy Stewart - Girl Waits With Gun
Philip Roth - The Plot Against America
Norm Macdonald - Based on a True Story
Christopher Buckley - Boomsday
Ryan Holiday - The Obstacle is the Way
Ruth Sepetys - Between Shades of Gray
Richard Adams - Watership Down
Claire Vaye Watkins - Gold Fame Citrus
Markus Zusak - I am the Messenger
Anthony Doerr - All the Light We Cannot See
James Joyce - Dubliners
Cheryl Strayed - Torch
William Golding - Lord of the Flies
Saul Bellow - Mister Sammler's Planet
Phil Stanford - White House Call Girl
John Kaplan & Jon R. Waltz - The Trial of Jack Ruby
Kent Haruf - Eventide
David Halberstam - Summer of '49
Norman Mailer - The Naked and the Dead
Maria Dermoȗt - The Ten Thousand Things
William Faulkner - As I Lay Dying
Markus Zusak - The Book Thief
Christopher Buckley - Thank You for Smoking
William Shakespeare - Othello
Joseph Conrad - Heart of Darkness
Bill Bryson - A Short History of Nearly Everything
Cheryl Strayed - Tiny Beautiful Things
Sara Varon - Bake Sale
Stephen King - 11/22/63
Paul Goldstein - Errors and Omissions
Mark Twain - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
Steve Martin - Born Standing Up: A Comic's Life
Beverly Cleary - A Girl from Yamhill, a Memoir
Kent Haruf - Plainsong
Hope Larson - A Wrinkle in Time, the Graphic Novel
Rudyard Kipling - Kim
Peter Ames Carlin - Bruce
Fran Cannon Slayton - When the Whistle Blows
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt

Road Work

Miles run year to date: 5
At this date last year: 3
Total run in 2017: 113
In 2016: 155
In 2015: 271
In 2014: 401
In 2013: 257
In 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269

Clicky Web Analytics