Thanks for the question.
First of all, I agree with Mr. Baker completely that the resources from the forest, including trees, including wildlife, including water and soil, aren't monetized. Because they are public assets, the access to any of those things can change depending on how the province decides it wants to allocate that. There's very little incentive to intensively manage most forest land on public land. It's a difficult challenge, and I think it's a problem right across the country.
The other side of that argument, of course, is that it is public land and you need to have the province—the landowner—maintain control and make sure things are being managed in a sustainable way, and that other parts of the forest ecosystem are being treated with equal emphasis.
I guess I would say I agree with him, and I would also make the point that you make, that private forest land is managed in a much different way, which is why, as I mentioned, only 13% of Canada's managed forest is privately owned, yet that 13% produces 18% of the forest products in Canada because it is much more intensively managed. Owners can make that investment without fear of someone saying that's good work but that wood is now going to be allocated somewhere else or that they no longer have access to that portion of the land base, which happens from time to time on provincial crown land.