Grandpa, Plunker,

You're cracking me up! I've read enough of your posts over a long enough period to know you both have cognitive capability. And you both know GWB had less than nothing to do with any recent good salmon returns (nor any bad ones for that matter, either).

Allow me to share my confusion. I'm passionate about fish and fishing. You appear to share that passion. I've never seen you argue that high quality habitat isn't essential for good salmon production. Quality fish habitat is fundamentally dependent on enviromental protection. Yet, the Republicans and conservative philosophy you identify with appears hell bent on severely degrading, if not outright destruction of, that environment that produces the fish and fishing we seem so mutually passionate about. Consequently, I've been driven away from conservatism in my interest to protect what I regard as the wellspring of life: air, water, and of course, fish habitat. (insert smiley face here.)

I wasn't born liberal. I regard a liveable planet as my birthright, altho that's probably naive. And I think clean air and water are policy imperatives. I just don't understand the conservative -apparent- obsession with degrading air and water, the elements that sustain us, just to make a short-term dollar. It feels like Republicans must all be rich enough to drink bottled water, so that their children don't have to use public water supplies that their business practices will poison. But what about the air? We all have to breath it, polluted or not.

Supporting conservative philosophy appears to require denying any relationship between human action and environmental outcome. How do you do it? Or do you really not care?

Sincerely,

Salmo g.