Perhaps I'll take a start at that. The Athabasca watershed is a relatively large area. In terms of baseline, there are two types of baselines that you're looking at. One of them is what I'll call lakes and rivers that are naturally occurring in the environment and are not underlain by oil sands. They're out there, but there are no oil sands in the deposit sitting underneath those lakes or rivers.
The second type of baseline you're looking at is naturally occurring systems where there are oil sands that are underlying the resource. The levels of naphthenic acids and PAHs will occur naturally; they're present in all of these systems. They're lower in the ones that are not underlain by oil sands. They're higher in the ones that are underlain by oil sands, and then when you get into the leases, where there's direct influence of process water, then they're very high.
To be perfectly honest, part of your question is the reason I've been trying to get—and have gotten hold of—old RAMP data to try to look at what's there. But we can still get that information by going sufficiently far away from the areas that are associated with oil sands activity, from either a groundwater or surface water area, and we can go in a wind direction that probably wouldn't be subject to atmospheric transport and deposition.
The ideal situation would be to have started 40 years ago with baseline activity. Most of my work is in what I call the impacts of base metal mining—copper, lead, cadmium, and zinc. I got into the oil sands business after I'd done quite a bit of research in this other area. In 30-odd years of working in that and in litigations on environmental activity and research, I have never had what I would call sufficient baseline data. So if you're looking to find it, it's almost never there.
I'll settle for four years of data—four consecutive years of data.