Good question. The, the, the reality is that the sources of money to build an exhibit, an expensive exhibit and the source of money to help in the field are usually from completely different people. So very often the people that are generating or finding the resources to build that exhibit are not necessarily going to be keen to pump a, a large proportion of that money into the field. Now, what is happening in some zoos, and, and we’re certainly doing it in North Carolina, is that where we are building expensive exhibits, we are also building conservation programs around those, talking about field conservation programs, building conservation programs around those. Because apart from anything else, what we’re showing in the exhibits are interpreted in one way, interpreted much better by showing that you are doing something in the field. And those in those in a way can be reflected in the exhibits. So I think there’s much more of connection of what you’re doing in the field with what you’re showing in exhibit. Very often the choice of species connects those two, I’m a strong believer in that a proportion of funds going into an exhibit should be channeled into, into field work. Now what it, what that should be, I mean, a lot of the anti zoo, a lot of the critics are zoo saying, oh, you know, it should be at least 10%, 20%.
