The comment was made in one of your panels here that fishers who benefit from access to public resources should contribute to costs. I think it's not an unreasonable assumption. I think what's created some problems here is the fact that it's happened suddenly, and any change is disquieting, to say the least.
I'll switch directions and go to the habitat management program and environmental process modernization plan. I was certainly glad to see that we're making a framework there for moving ahead in that realm. I noticed in your presentation that you discuss examples like vegetation clearing or maybe building bridges over a waterway as issues, if I can use those examples, but is there a plan for habitat enhancement envisioned as part of this, or is simply a plan for mitigating problems that may arise in the future from disturbing a habitat?