Thank you very much for that question. In answering it, I'll answer the part of the question Mr. Manning asked that I didn't get to.
Again it was a unanimous recommendation from the committee, because we believed it was the right and proper thing to do. To me, the summer was a tremendous success. It did a couple of things. It gave us a very good idea of the concentrations of inshore codfish after rebuilding the base stocks. It gave a tremendous amount of people a feeling they hadn't had for years. They could finally get on the water again, where they grew up, and experience what a lot of us have experienced over the years, from the older people--and I've heard from a lot of them--to the very young. Older people said they were so delighted to let their grandson or granddaughter experience what it was like to be on the water and catch fish. These things are very important. But we have to remind ourselves that this can only continue as long as the resource is stable.
We're in the process now of analyzing the information we got on concentrations, size, migratory patterns, etc., in order to see--to answer the other part of Mr. Manning's question--if we can have a similar type of fishery next year. If you asked the Newfoundland members here, they would certainly agree that they got a lot more positive comments from people on this initiative than negative ones.
When we analyze the information we have, we'll know where we're going. We had 100% cooperation. Very few people abused the system. I think we came in under the amount we had allocated. If it turns out to be a failure, the amount was so small that even though it might have stymied growth, or whatever, it certainly wouldn't have done irreparable harm. So we really didn't have too many pangs of conscience over taking the chance on this initiative.
We'll know very shortly if the stocks are growing enough and have grown enough to be able to maintain this type of initiative on an annual basis.