AS: Well, it was principally, in my judgment, a-a function of the way the federal system works. I-I advocated the listing of both the Golden-cheeked Warbler and the Black-capped Vireo, I mean, I think there's letters in the file to that effect. I supported their listing as endangered species. But, what-what the federal system subsequently did, was that it put people who were, and this is not said in the pejorative, but like, junior level biologists in a position of negotiating with mayors, or county judges, or people, you know, who-who-for whom they were not really prepared, by experience, or job title, or rank, to deal with. And so that was a-that was a-that caused a-a lot of stress that would otherwise-that-that-that-that-that really set us back in many ways in terms 33:04 - 2187of public acceptance of conservation, particularly by private landowners during the nineties. I'll give you an example, and Susan will remember this, there was a point in time in the nineties when the-when the junior biologists in the Fish and Wildlife Service prepared to publish a map-a series of maps that identified some sixteen counties in Central Texas as being, you know, critical habitat for these birds. Well, I think that probably was valuable information, but it ended up sort of being leaked out of the federal 33:44 - 2187bureaucracy before its time, and everybody got frightened about it because they didn't know what it was or what it was for. And it caused the whole sort of, Take Back Texas movement, which changed our politics in Texas. I mean, it didn't just affect me; it probably was a principal reason why George Bush was elected governor in Texas. And it was because-because of a, frankly, a clumsy approach, you know, to what was basically sort of legitimate scientific information, put into the public arena in a-in a awkward way that caused us, in fact, us to be dramatically set back in many ways in terms of where we were trying to head. So, I think a lot of it just-just happened at-I'll tell you that one of 34:34 - 2187the things that I-I have learned over-that I believe deeply is that-that the p-p-public entities that are closer to the people, being state and local government, if their motivations are correct can do a better job of doing some of these things, particularly with local people. So therefore, what I've always figured is, my challenge was to bring the right motivations, the right science, to the government which was closest to the people, because that's the government that they're going to be the most likely to trust. And I think that, still, today is our single greatest challenge in Texas is to continue to fight at the local and state level to get those institutions more a-attuned to the goals of 35:28 - 2187protecting things like endangered species and other things. Because I-I feel like-that they're going to be more likely to-to gain the trust of the people who actually possess the habitat for these species than a government which is far removed from them. And I do believe that. DT: So for a long time science has seemed to get pretty politicized with hired-gun experts, and charges of junk science and good science. Can you talk about your experiences heading up a large group of biologists who were trying to make arguments that often got couched for political terms and you had to take the heat for it?36:21 - 2187AS: Well, I think first and foremost...DT: Maybe you could talk about the state of the Natural Heritage Program?(misc)36:33 - 2187