As Jean Charest said at the end of that session yesterday evening, if there's one thing you want to achieve, it's for people to be motivated to do something. The characteristic of those programs that work is that the people who have the power to make a change in the interest of long-term conservation want to do it.
Ducks Unlimited, I think, would be the best example. They took an ecosystem, before I ever came to Canada, and said, “Oh, we have all these wonderful ducks, which are hunted by aboriginal people, hunters, etc., in the summer on their way and in the winter. Let's plan it according to scale to those ducks' needs.” So, okay, there's the plan—the North American waterfowl management plan—cooperating across political boundaries, putting in what the ducks need.
Then of course they are good at fundraising. Federal dollars are put in there with the mix to actually come up with elevated protection for a network of the habitat that the waterfowl need, and of course, those same areas that are good for snow geese and widgeon are actually very good for many of these frogs and other organisms and plants in those freshwater systems. So it's about looking after the habitat, really, but it's done through the lens of the ducks because the value component is the meat and the duck.
I'm a bird watcher. I love to see flocks of ducks and geese heading north in the spring, but they can only do that because they have the habitat in place. So the people who value the resource are motivated and they need incentives, as we were saying earlier, including some money to help them manage these expensive water regimes to improve the amount of habitat and to restore wetland habitat in some areas where mistakes were made.