I'm not aware of enforcement actions yet, and it's a reflection of... As has been pointed out, there is not a lot of critical habitat that has been identified yet, but we're in train of doing so. I'm trying to explain. It's not that easy to identify it.
But I do want to flag for you, just on two points you made, that the draft policies really do speak to how critical habitat is based on the biological needs of the species, point final, and there's a clarification that socio-economic factors are not considered in the identification of critical habitat.
That lesson, I think, has been learned well. We're clear, and it is reflected in the draft policies that were out and will be finalized, so we're very much, I think, in the same place that you are.
On the caribou, if I could just give a short response, that's where I thought we were going several years ago, which was: “Here are your calving islands, give me a few corridors, and let's have a chunk here and we're done”. But that's not what the scientists advised. They are very clear: you need to manage at the level of the landscape and you need to allow such that the disturbance can move around, because that's part of the biology of the caribou. But you need to ensure that there's enough intact landscape at any one time. That's what we've been told. So the question is, how much is enough and what does it look like and so on? That's where we're at.