Okay. I notice two themes. One is that you talked a lot about the need to infuse science, and I wonder if one of you could just summarize this. It's my understanding that you're recommending that there also be a COSEWIC type of committee of scientists for the recovery strategy and critical habitat area. One of you also recommended that it's actually missing from the statute, and that they're consulting with everyone except scientists, which I thought was a really good thing to point out.
We've heard a lot from people who are saying that we should have socio-economic considerations in that second stage of recovery, and then there are others who are saying no, they shouldn't be there. I'd like to hear your opinion on that.