Under the beef science cluster we did invest substantial funds looking at tech transfer. We looked at models like Australia's, Israel's, and several others. What we found is that past extension models, which are primarily provincial, were useful, but our industry has changed too, and we need to reach beef producers in some cases for things like forage, but we also need to reach suppliers and processors, depending on what the research is and where it should be directed, and drug companies, when technologies are getting to the point they can be in.... We're looking at alternative ways to do that and reach the right groups with all of the research outcomes, because we do span a broad spectrum.
The second part of that is awareness. The more awareness of the value of research, the more investment we can likely procure from check-off, which industry...that's an ultimate goal of ours. If you have awareness and understanding of the value, you create greater investment opportunity.
The last part, though, is that under the first Growing Forward program we had understood there was going to be another program—and I apologize for not knowing the correct name—that was a sister program to the science clusters and would focus on innovation transfer. It was supposed to be released shortly. The concern is that we're almost done with the first Growing Forward—I mean we're into consultations. So for this program, when it's released, I fully expect funds.... A plan will have to be submitted. It takes time to build that, and then funds will have to be expended by March 31, 2013. That's part of the issue in terms of effectiveness of funding that we need to look at, because that innovation program is very promising if it's going to coordinate with the science clusters and that opportunity. But those plans take time to develop and then implement.