It actually was a turning point for the river in terms of the community's recognition of it as an asset. It really was a sewer in its old day, and up through the 1980s, even as the quality improved, people still perceived it that way. The designation really rallied the communities up and down the river, and they put up scenic route signs and actually started to make plans to integrate it into their downtown revitalization plans and to work on the trail networks more by at least investing more in them and connecting them together better. People in the area started to perceive the Grand River as an asset, which it hadn't been before, so it was a big turning point.
It did not impose any restrictions. We have to report every five years on whether or not the things for which it was valued and designated are still there and we haven't actually lost them. I suppose we could lose the designation if we can't keep that up. It is a five-year rally, again, around whether we have done our job here locally.
I can't see there was any disadvantage at all in having the designation. It doesn't place any legal obligations on anyone, but it is a rallying thing for the community.