That is good.
Why is it that critical habitats are hardly taken into account in recovery plan strategies? According to the figures you gave us today, which have been made public, 106 of the 278 recovery strategies were carried out to completion. So there is a problem when it comes to completing recovery strategies.
There is also another problem. The recovery strategies do not take into account critical habitat. We have subsequent, cumulative problems. As a result, if I understand correctly, species are not protected, and there is no recovery plan.
Why is there such a long delay in terms of recovery plans?