I might simply mention that I think the key importance underlying your question is one of monitoring. In the absence of monitoring programs, we don't have information upon which to judge the efficacy or the utility of a national conservation program, whether it's on land or in the water.
We have all sorts of indices to measure economic quality of life in this country—GDP, interest rates set by the Bank of Canada, unemployment statistics, job creation statistics—and every month or every quarter we look at these to judge where we are. We currently do not have such indicators for the terrestrial or aquatic biodiversity realm. We don't really know where we are relative to where we were in the past and where we would like to be--in other words, what sorts of goals and indicators and operational objectives we should have.
I would hope that a national conservation plan would identify what those national conservation objectives, and perhaps biodiversity indicators, ought to be so we can then track them through appropriate monitoring programs.
I can't underscore too strongly how important such a basic element of monitoring can be for the success of your venture today.