Thank you, Mr. Hubbard.
In terms of who would benefit, it's clear, and I think we touched on it just a few seconds ago when we were talking about expecting higher feed grain costs for the foreseeable future. What that tells me is that we need more feed grains. The Americans have done a very good job of figuring out how to grow more feed grains, and they do that. We have not done that in Canada. We have this flat line, in terms of production, in our grain sector. And we've seen pure research and applied research funding from governments, at all levels, drop off drastically, to almost being eliminated.
We can't create any more acres in Canada, or in North America for that matter. We can fiddle with which crops draw which acres, but we can't create more acres. What we need to do, facing increased marketing opportunities—be it export, be it feed grains, be it biofuel—is produce more from the same land base we have. There's clearly an opportunity to do that if we have better varieties.
In the barley research—and, again, really, this is Doug's domain more than mine—it's my understanding that most of the research has been directed toward malt varieties and very little has been towards feed varieties, which I guess implies that we like to drink beer more than we like to eat barley products.
One of the things we can do is direct more research to get better yielding varieties to produce more product from the same acreage.