In answer to the question, it is one approach if the objective is, again, managing or improving fisheries habitat. But if your objective is to reduce phosphorus on a very wide scale across the landscape, then I would assume that the guidelines of that program would restrict its ability to be applied.
I think the second issue has to do with the amount of money that actually needs to be sustained going into this. We at Conservation Ontario a number of years ago had collectively identified an investment of around $50 million a year that would be able to be leveraged but would be necessary to maintain the level of effort that we would need to get conservation tillage, nutrient reduction, and best management practices on that part of the landscape that is really contributing 80% of the problem.