so when politics are bound to get in the way of an agreement's approval, it's better to include skeptical parties than to build wall about negotiators. I mean, this is a personal thing. I think that certain state representatives and senators as well as some major irrigators might have been, if they have been educated on the negotiations prior to the documents, public release, it's possible. I don't know know this is for certain, but it's possible that some of their resistance could have been mitigated. And then again, adaptive, which we've talked about before this class, adaptive governance necessitates shared control. Finally, I didn't know what to do with this. It's one question I've been graphing with the past days is I've been editing my doc by like my written report which is what should we basically what should we make of the fact that even after the CSKT after the tribes had negotiated with everybody in good faith they had to give up additional rights in order to get it passed by a US Congress is there another system given the complexity of  process, another system that could have been set up to help create a process that wouldn't have required as much legal approval? Or is that simply a fact of history and we need to accept it? And I'm just, the question I'm interested. And with that, I will open it up for comments and questions and I know those a lot. So thank you all. Thank you. Um, Aaron for the nice presentation. So now I would like to ask us nine to make comments and feedback. Very well done, Erin