So let's see if Doc has this right: we actually need more trees cut down for use in paper in order to keep them from being cut down by real-estate developers? Actually, I do get it – managed forests are better than no forest at all. Of course, Peter's right about that. But in the end, less dependency on wood-pulp products is probably a good thing, even if in the short term we make that dependency much more efficient. I'm all for both, and to the degree that we can make trees a truly renewable resource, all the better.