Yes. I think in submissions made by the Sierra Club, certainly, when I was the executive director there a few years ago, we did an analysis of the changes made in the 2009 budget, which basically removed the Navigable Waters Protection Act as a trigger. That had a number of important impacts. For 2010, there were thousands of projects that were no longer assessed by virtue of the changes that were made.
I think what I want to say about it is that I don't necessarily disagree that we need to reduce the number of environmental assessments that are done federally—by some estimates, 5,000 a year—but it's how you go about that, and ensuring that we try to and do catch the big ones, because eliminating the Navigable Waters Protection Act trigger meant, in some cases, that a number of dams and dikes were not assessed that clearly had implications for aquatic ecosystems, and they were not subject to the Fisheries Act trigger.
So yes, we can give you more information about the impacts of those cuts, but--