There is a cost that comes with implementing this program, to be sure. As noted earlier, in some fisheries where there was very little monitoring, this is the new incremental cost. But over the course of the season, adjustments were made to try to minimize that cost.
If I could give you an example, we require either an observer or a camera on board the groundfish boats. You have a choice. For some of the smaller vessels, what was eventually decided was that one camera could be distributed among three vessels, as long as the vessels obviously weren't going out at the same time. A vessel would come in and would trade the camera off to the next vessel, and that second vessel would take it out. It would come back in and the camera would go onto a third vessel.
From our perspective that's fine. We still get the information that we require for documentation. From the vessels' perspective, they've been able to amortize the cost of the camera over three vessels rather than one. So that's an example of what we did to reduce costs.
The second point I would make is that because the value of some of the species actually went up in 2006 as a result of the pilot, and because some of the fishermen now are selling their bycatch, whereas before they had to discard it, we're being advised that in some instances the cost of netting out is very close to neutral. In other words, even with the costs of monitoring being present, they have been offset by the value of the species going up and by being able to sell bycatch.