 I won't go in at great lengths to the importance of saving the forest because all of us here believe in that. I strongly worry about climate change and I am very committed to the need for re-growing and saving and regeneration of our forests. As a student of economic governance and policy, I am also deeply concerned that some red policies be adopted with great care. I'm a supporter. I want to see it happen. But we have to be very, very careful about the way we do this to ensure that they do not facilitate more deforestation and degradation rather than less. A group of us have been engaged now in a large interdisciplinary project of the International Forestry Resources and Institutions Program. Ifri, my colleague Bernie Fisher, sitting here in the front, has been working with us as a forester. So we are really an interdisciplinary program that blends social science and biology, ecology and forestry, I think very effectively. We're working with centers in Bolivia, Colombia, Guatemala, India, Kenya, Mexico, Nepal, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, and the United States. And we have new centers being started in Ethiopia and China. Forestry is unique among efforts to study as forests as it is the only interdisciplinary long-term monitoring and research program, studying forests owned by governments, by private organizations, and by multiple communities around the world. As we know, forests are particularly important given their role in climate change and carbon sequestration and saving biodiversity, and their contributions to rural livelihoods. Recently, over the last 10 years or so, a very favorite policy has been that the way to save forests is create government protected areas. And we've taken that seriously, and among many of the sites we've studied are government protected areas. And one of the studies that Tonya Hayes and I recently did several years ago was to look at the rating of forest density in a random sample of forest plots in 163 forests. Those 163 forests included 76 which were government owned forests that were registered as legally designated protected areas. The 87 other forests were government forests for harvesting, private forests, community forests, just a whole array of other kinds of forests. We found absolutely no statistical difference between the government designated protected areas and all the other kinds of forests in terms of forest density. We did find that whether local users could make some of the rules made some difference, but protected areas, we found no difference. We've also examined Gibson and Williams and I the role of local communities in monitoring behavior. And I'm going to be talking quite a bit about monitoring and the willingness of local communities to watch each other and if someone's in the forest that they don't know who are you or if they're there on a day that they shouldn't be. Did you forget that Wednesday is a day we're not going to harvest or any of the other things that people in a community can do with one another or if it's someone outside how to get officials to get them out.