Yes, sir, you get it. One has to be extremely careful not to let scarce resources, whether human or financial, be spent on anything but the most important areas. If, for example, the province of Alberta generally speaking has an overall healthy walleye or pickerel population and there are problems in certain specific geographical areas, I would agree with you that SARA is not the tool to address those site-specific problems. Furthermore, if SARA were used as a tool, it would be the inappropriate tool.
Finally, we want to again ensure not only our members.... I agree with you that all Canadians want to see healthy nature, healthy fish and wildlife. I think SARA is a symbol for Canadians, but in a way it's a symbol of society's failure to adequately protect species and habitats. That's why I've been emphasizing on behalf of my organization that we must keep the other 95% of species and their habitats healthy so that in 50 years we won't need a SARA. That should be our goal.