Thank you again for your question.
I would need to double-check the exact facts with respect to the wood turtle just in case it had changed status, but perhaps I could make a more general comment about the priority species for funding.
The habitat stewardship program started way back in 2000, and our priority obviously was to focus on those species that are listed under the Species at Risk Act. Within that we focus on endangered and threatened species, species of special concern. When we score project proposals, they get a lower score because we're trying to keep our eye on the ball of the highest-priority species.
The habitat stewardship program has operated since 2000. In the initial year it had $5 million. It was operating at about $12 million per year until the national conservation plan came along, which added funds to the program.
The other feature or policy change that occurred was the opportunity to fund projects for species that are not actually listed under the Species at Risk Act, so now we can also fund projects to prevent species from becoming endangered. What does that mean? It means it opens up an opportunity for any species. If it's a good project delivering on the Species at Risk Act or helping to prevent species from becoming at risk, we can fund it. So I think we now have a policy frame for the program that is not limiting.
The only other comment I want to make is that I wouldn't want any of my comments to be seen as being linked to the matter of the western chorus frog. That matter is before the courts, and I wouldn't want anything I'm saying today to be construed as being connected to that particular court case.