 Okay. Catherine, before I get started, I wanted to apologize. I'm not going to be talking about instrumentation, although I spent most of my career working on instrumentation and methods for subsurface characterization. Instead, what I thought I'd focus on is the lessons I've learned from that work and the relevance for the discussion that we're having today. So I'm going to do it using a simple aquifer water balance to illustrate my points. Now, since I'm the last official speaker, I thought I'd keep things fairly simple here with these slides. So what I've got here is a cross-section through an unconfined aquifer. I'm showing various components of the aquifer water budget. This is not all inclusive, but I think it captures the major players. Now, one of the major objectives of subsurface characterization is to go in and quantify each one of these components of the budget. Now, the reality is that is a very important and laudable long-term objective. But frankly, we are not there currently to solve this equation I've got there at the top. So where do we go from here in the near term to get at issues of great societal relevance? So that depends on the questions that we're trying to answer. I think we've mentioned that previously. And in Kansas, we're interested, like so many other areas of the world, we're interested in irrigated agriculture, questions associated with irrigated agriculture. And one of the big questions is what is the aquifer's response to pumping changes, whether they be mandated by management or be a product of climatic trends? These are the type of questions that we need to address. We get asked in Kansas by the irrigation community. They recognize that things are going south in the high plains aquifer in western Kansas. They like to extend the lifespan of the resource. How do we do it? Well, they've got one choice because there's no surface water to be had in western Kansas. We've dried up all the rivers. So the one choice is to reduce pumping. And so how much do they need to reduce to have a significant impact on decline rates? Those are the questions we get asked, and they don't want to meet us to respond. Well, I can get that within a factor of three or four because these are, they're reducing pumping, they're taking on risk. And there's a big economic liability for them. They want to have some confidence in what we're telling them. So what we decided to do is say, okay, we've got this water balance, but let's be frank about it. Most of these components of the water balance we cannot currently quantify. The one that we can, with confidence in Kansas, as we've alluded to earlier, is pumping because virtually all the high capacity pumping wells in the high plains aquifer are metered, reported annually subject to regulatory verification. We have confidence in that. The rest of it, we don't. So let's take all those other components of the water balance and lump them together into a single term and simplify. We got water volume change. An aquifer equals net inflow minus pumping. Net inflow is everything flowing in minus everything flowing out safe pumping. This is the same as the catch capture component of aquifer depletion assessments, which the importance of which has been emphasized over the years by USGS hydrologists, John Bradohoff, Lenny Connickow, Bill Alley, and others. Now, this is critical to know this component of the water budget in order to predict an aquifer's response to pumping reductions. Now, in Kansas, we have the data. We can solve this equation. So we can estimate this. We can directly calculate the net inflow from field data, and we can do it over for the last 20 years we've done this. And one of the things we found in western Kansas, which is semi-arid, we've got relatively large depths to water, that this term is basically a constant in time. It's been constant over the last 20 years. In subhuman central Kansas, it varies a relatively small amount, 15, 20 percent, over that time period. So we can do a lot by just working with the net inflow of the recent past and saying this will be the net inflow of the near future and use that to estimate the pumping reductions. And we have done that in field experiments over 256 square kilometer area and shown the power of this approach. And I think there's a lot we can do with that. And it's got the irrigation community in Kansas on board with the idea they can reduce pumping and have an immediate impact. Now, this net inflow of the recent past is not going to be the net inflow of 50 years from now. It's going to be maybe years to a few decades we'll be able to use this approach to predict pumping reductions. Eventually, it's going to change because the aquifer is going to respond to those pumping changes. And so it depends on the aquifer response time and how long we can have confidence in this. But we can't have confidence. We can't have confidence in the near term, years to maybe a couple of decades. Now, why is that relevant to this discussion? The reason it is is because as we've heard earlier today and on this panel, we can get information or on the verge of getting information about what water volume change in the aquifer via various satellite approaches, I think we've got the potential to get pumping via remote sensing as well. So with that information, we can solve this net inflow component of the water budget and be able to make short term predictions of how an aquifer is going to respond to a drought which would cause increased pumping or to management changes. So I think there's a lot of potential here for the remote sensing community to give us information that'll get us answers of quite relevant to society and help meet societal expectations. And with that, I'm done. Thank you.