I do not believe so. In point of fact, the biologists and the socio-economists who were involved in this dossier would agree that they were both suffering mightily. The species declined extraordinarily rapidly, and so did the jobs related to the sports fisheries for these species in these areas. They were lost at the same time. So there was a driver on both sides to try to do something.
If I could add a comment here in relation to what Mr. Quinney has been saying, we do tend to get lost in trying to get a species listed as the primary focus, and that's not the point. What we're trying to do is get a species recovered.
If SARA has a weakness, in our opinion, it is the fact that much time and resources go into the effort to get a species listed on paper—the paper exercise—but once we get to the point where a species is listed, the resources are not in place to actually implement the recovery effort and bring back the benefits that we've been missing. So I would hope that, in the future, it will be the kind of direction we'll move in.