In terms of the Fisheries Act, that act is really quite extensive, and in terms of managing fisheries, the minister has the responsibility of sustainability and also protecting habitat.
For example, a recent report done by a group of scientists was published in Science Magazine. It rated the various science regimes around the world in terms of their adherence to the FAO code for responsible fisheries management. The Canadian regime came third; Norway came fourth.
So you're quite right. If you have a fisheries management regime out there notwithstanding some difficulties in its current shape with the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, and a management regime that has been compared to the FAO code of conduct for responsible fisheries, there is a question: why do we then need another act such as the Species at Risk Act with very blunt tools? It's a good question.