With agricultural water you have a certain amount of complexity, whereby the amount of water you apply to a farm is not necessarily the amount consumed. There are several “flow paths” that water can travel and field boundaries come into play in the analysis. In most cases you have to have much higher level of analytics behind the amount of water, you’re not only applying, but what’s being conserved, and some validation for where the rest of that water goes. When you look at analyzing that level of data, the reason we have been referred to as “Quickbooks®* for your water accounting,” like Quickbooks®*, or a tool like Quicken®* analyzes the sub-accounts of where your money is going. Perhaps you can see what you’ve withdrawn from your bank account, which would be the same as applied water to your field. Imagine you have 100 units of water. Maybe you apply 50 of those 100 units of water that you have the rights to. The question is, where are you spending those 50 units of water? Knowing that is important. In most western jurisdictions you’re only getting credit for conserved water, or a “water bank,” that you’re depositing back in, if it’s based off of something other than applied water. You have to show that you’re not gaming the system. You’re not robbing Peter to pay Paul. You’re not pulling from another sub account. That’s the level we’re at with water in the West, specifically with agriculture.