 Thank you, Vince. I'll have the first talk then. When I was writing it, when I was writing down the paper, I thought it was, it has different angles with it touches to the rural policy, but it's not entire, but you will see. It all fits nicely together. So I'll just walk you through it, and then if you have questions, I'll be here. This talk is on behalf of myself. So I'm Carl, work at the Flemish Land Agency, an agency of the Ministry of Nature, Environment, and Energy. And it's together with my colleague, Ereben Malemans, who works at the Flemish Heritage Agency, because as you will see, there's a lot of things overlapping more and more next years and the last years to come. So we have a nice future together, I hope. So that's what I will be talking about. So it's first a bit about the legislation, the data sets we have available for the moment, how we, our projects and our work interests interact, and how we can see opportunities for both of them. And then I'll illustrate with some examples and draw some conclusions. So recently in 2016, there was a new Heritage Act, which integrated the legislation that was in place from the 30s on. You had a Monuments Act, a Landscape Act, an Archaeology Act, and then they draw it all together in one new Heritage Act. Some new items in it, important items in the story is that they can now designate archaeological zones. So these are zones, areas where there's presumed high-quality archaeological remains present. So it's not the same as a scheduling. It's really something with a scientific potential, say. Another new thing, very important, is that you need an archaeological, to make an archaeological assessment when you are applying a planning permission. If you have to do that, it depends on the nature of your development. If there's not much, you're not doing a lot of disturbance in the soil, you don't need it, but from some thresholds you need to make that. It depends on the location, of course. If it's on a scheduled site, you have to do it anyway, and otherwise it depends on whether it's in or outside an archaeological zone. So if it's bigger than 5,000 square meters, or if you're an official body organization, then bigger than 3,000 square meters, and your impact of the development is more than 1,000 square meters, you have to make an archaeological assessment. And when it's inside an archaeological zone, then you almost always have to make this assessment. An assessment, it starts with a desktop. If the desktop shows, clearly there's no archaeology left there anymore, then that's okay. But if it shows there's a possibility, you have to make steps further and see how far you have to go to make sure you get your planning permission. Something new in the heritage act also is they can now draw up heritage direction plans. I don't know really how to translate that. It is a on-route-en-terre-foute-richt-plan. They call it in Dutch, so it's about which direction you should go with an area with something, which is a participative project with all stakeholders involved in an area. It's about a long-term vision. You have to think about 20 or more years, and you can make an action program together with it. But of course the problem, if you have an action program, you need money to do that, and there's still some work to be done there. And that's also where we, as a Flemish land agency, will tap into. We also had a new legislation for my department, my agency, so a new land development act. What's new in there? We have a big toolkit now with different instruments. We used to have different regulations, but now it's all integrated, so a big toolkit with a nature development instrument, land consolidation, land use planning, land exchange, land banks, the stewardship schemes, it's all in there. So if we have a project, you can use whatever tool you like. And so our main objective is to develop and manage the countryside. There are three tracks we call them. I don't really know how to translate it otherwise. Three tracks, we have the real land development plans that my agency does, which is financed by the Flemish government. That's our core business, say. On the other hand, you have a track two is a development that we will do with on demand of another authority who has to make sure that there's financing for it also. And then there's a third track, which is about agreements and compensation for services, which is also on demand of some other authority. While this was happening, you had the new legislation and new things happening. Of course, there are a lot of datasets available for the moment. We have a new digital elevation model, which is available free for the entire part of Flanders, very high resolution, more than 16 points square meter and sometimes even more. Of course, we have a lot of other data like the parcel registration of the agriculture department, potential erosion maps, where we have the European stewardship schemes or where we have special attention, the Natura 2000, everything that is scheduled to new archeological designated zones. All the archeological data, you can easily, when you have an interest in an area, can easily put on all these layers and have directly, you can see opportunities, threats to very, very easy. So that's also a way to raise profile of an area and to see how people can start working together. And this is what I will illustrate in a minute with a few examples. So we see a lot of interaction and opportunities. So for instance, the Flanders Heritage Agency can schedule an archeological site or designate an archeological zone. They can do it on their own behalf based on archeological finds by research, by metal detecting based on a DTM data or even as sometimes happens when we do an archeological research for one of our projects, we say, this is interesting. And then as a reaction they designate or can schedule the site. So we have a constant interaction. As I said, the designation has only an impact on the archeological assessment, whether it is needed or not needed, otherwise there's no legal obligation tied to that. The scheduling as an archeological site has a smaller impact on other authorities, but still you have no impact on the present land use. You cannot say to a farmer, you cannot plow anymore or you cannot interfere with the normal working of the farmer. But when there is an overlap between archeological zones or scheduled archeological monuments with projects of my agency, then we do have these possibilities to do some land exchange, to pay compensation for services, to start up a special stewardship scheme or to have the agri-environment agreements try to deploy them. Because, for instance, we have agronomists working on my agency and they can make an analysis of the farming practice, which farmers are active in which area, how big is their farm, what do they do, do they have stock or not, cattle or not, and they can see how an exchange of land can happen to rearrange parcels, so you can have another land use on a certain area, for instance. And we have farm planners working for our agency who can then inform the farmers and try to convince them to do special stewardship scheme of to take up an agri-environment stewardship scheme which is favorable for biodiversity and archeology. Even when there's no overlap with projects, my agency is running, there are still some possibilities. You still have the agri-environment agreements where our farm planners can assist the heritage agency in trying to deploy these. We are thinking, well, we've been thinking for the last 15 years already, I think, to have a special heritage agreement, and with this special designation of archeological zones, of course, you have extra burden in the planning process, so that might be some opening for us to have the ministry agreeing with a special heritage agreement to compensate the extra burden that farmers have when they need an archeological assessment in their planning processes. And also, as I told before, when farmers' heritage wants to start up an heritage direction plan, they can activate the third track where you can have agreements and compensation for services, but then, of course, there's the question of the financing, but the instrument, the framework, and the toolkits is at least available. I'll try to illustrate these points I made in a few examples. Recently, the heritage agency designated an archeological zone for bent, linear bent ceramic sites, neolithic sites, it's in a limberig part of Flanders, the eastern part, where the landscape is more undulating, where you have erosion phenomena, the bent ceramics. This is one of the sites. You have a small plateau, but it's slightly sloping, so we have a lot of erosion taking place in these fields. This is what you see here. These are the potential erosion maps. So every farmer, when he gets his yearly parcel registration papers, he can see what the erosion, potential erosion of these fields are, and then he directly knows if he has to take some special measures or not. So you see, it goes from purple, which is a very high erosion to green, so you see there's a lot of reddish color here, so a lot of erosion taking place. This is the ordinary parcel registration where you see that a lot of these, while they are erosive parcels, they still have corn on it or grains, even sugar beads, which are very unfavorable for erosion, of course. If you see an overlap with the management plants we have for farm birds and hamsters, for instance, you directly see that there's an overlapping interest in these areas, which means our farm planners can go there and try to put in the agri-environment agreements. So we hope, in this case, that we can have a special heritage stewardship scheme for grassland on archaeological sites, archaeological designations. But we can also try to activate track two or three where we have a stewardship scheme, especially designed for the management of these archaeological sites, where we try to take archaeology and biodiversity into account and protect both. Or we can try to compensate farmers for services for the management of these archaeological sites. Important here is that the agri-environment stewardship schemes are only limited in time, of course, but the other agreements and compensation for services, you can have them for a longer period, as long as you have the finances for it, of course, which is every time. Second example, I'll be quickly with this one. This is a land consolidation project, reallotment. It's an area near Brussels. Brussels is a bit here to the east. It's also an undulating landscape. It's called the Pialtaland, very nice region. Come to Flanders, make sure you visit it. Here you have the Roman road going, and here on the southern part, you have, we already knew from previous prospections, field walking that there is a Roman ficus situated there. So for our project, we really wanted to know how big is this ficus and what are the qualities still there. We made a big magnetometry, geophysical prospection. So we have over 20 hectares scanned with it. We have a lot of, you see all the Roman houses with the backyards where the industry was taking place. You have somewhere here, there's traces of a temple. So it's really, it's a unique archaeological site. So then we gave all our data to the heritage agency and then they scheduled it. So now it's a scheduled archaeological site. But as you see, the, really the core area of six hectares of the heart of the ficus, which is still in agricultural use, you have still corn and sugar beads growing. So it's not likely to be there for a very long time. So we are thinking that we should do something with it. These are the erosion maps and the parcel registration maps. So what we are thinking of doing in this case is that in our project, we can rearrange the parcels. And so we can try to impose the land use that fits the archaeology best and fits the farmer best. And at the same time, we will try to legally fix the land use for the future. And then we can also compensate the owner for the easement of it. So it's okay to find a farmer who's willing to have grassland there, but of course when he stops and a new user comes, you cannot let it turn back to normal agricultural use. So we can use this compensation for the owner to pay him for the restrictions on his land. Other possibilities, the environmental agreements, maybe put flower meadows there or farm and bird crops, but of course, temporary agreement for the long term. But then we can use the instrument, but we cannot finance it. And unfortunately, the heritage agency cannot either. So that we have to try to find some other possibilities or we can design and develop the area to advocate the Roman vicus, for instance, and then pay somebody, a nature organization, for instance, or somebody else to manage the area. But then of course there's the same thing who will finance this. Last example, another possibility. Also a recent discovered site, well, recent a few years ago with a large high density DTM, you see these Celtic fields visible here. Which look more or less like this, because it feels 40 by 40 meters more or less, which are still preserved there. We, well, the heritage agency did some research there and have very nice results. And we should also try to protect them and to have a good management for that. But as you see here, this is not in agricultural use, but it's in forestry where you can have the same problem. So maybe here the possibility of a compensation for services to harvest it with respect for the archeology or not harvest areas or leave it more open or whatever. But there are some possibilities there too. Quickly some conclusions. So we see many possibilities for management of archeological areas when combining heritage agencies and our instruments. Problem is of course always the same, who will pay for this? And then in some cases of course, rural development plans are kept, is a way to help fund this, but drawback limited in time. You can only pay farmers with this European money and you have very strict procedures and control in place. So farmers are quite reluctant if you would. On the other hand, you have this 50% or even more maybe sometimes European co-financing. The farmers already, they know the instrument very well and you can hitchhike with the existing procedures and administrations working on that. So it's a bit, yeah, you have to balance things and see how it goes. For the moment when I think of it, if you want to really have for the long term, it might be a better option to have the farm advising financed with European funding and then try to find financing for the other instruments and other possibility and then an engagement of the Flemish authorities then to have the real instrument deployed in the field then. That was it, I think, yes. Sorry, slightly. I'm sorry, I'm starting at a tight two minutes. Oh, that's right. In that case, I'll go back and...