To go back to your question about climate change and how it's included in these types of analysis, in the fisheries model there is a provision for that with respect to looking at the current productivity rate of that stock. What you'll see from time to time is that the productivity rate will change. If you have a high productivity rate, it would mean, for example, that the water temperature is right, the currents are not too harsh, and other factors such as salinity are right. These factors are very positive in terms of regenerating that growth, and you can measure that.
We have seen, for example, that productivity of northern cod has declined. When you analyze that, you will see that there is an element of climate change, in the sense that the salinity has increased, which is basically a result of the icebergs melting off Norway. That has had a significant impact on that portion of our ecosystems.
In those same waters we've gone from having our groundfish on the verge to now being the number one producer in the world of cold-water shrimp, so there is an ecosystem out there. All we're saying is that we--not the Fisheries Council of Canada, but the fisheries biologists--are developing science to try to bring that into their incorporation, as I say, and assess the state of the stock on a number of factors. One of the very important ones is the current productivity rate of that species.
On the other hand, I have no problems with COSEWIC's formula, which is appropriate for terrestrial growth. It's basically the rate of decline, something that you can see. It's something that you can see in terms of animals and the environment they live in, while we're living basically under the water.