The additional sampling, which was essentially a tripling of the sampling capacity, as outlined in paragraph 16, was a good thing, to use your term.
The the main gaps are twofold. There isn't targeted surveillance of species at risk, which are the ones that are already in trouble because of habitat loss and so on. We have the exhibit about the whooping crane as an example of a highly endangered species that is now susceptible to avian flu. That's one gap.
The second gap is, looking forward, will this reallocation of money from other programs be sustainable without dedicated funding? That's a question Environment and Climate Change Canada will have to answer. With the current constraints regarding budgets, will it be able to find money for this program to sustain it? It's not the type of program for which you do the sampling once and then you can rest. You have to continue to do this to find whether the incidents of bird flu are increasing or not and whether it's being found in different species, such as swans, geese or ducks.
Those would be the two problems. There's the uncertainty of sustainable funding and the lack of targeted surveillance for species at risk.