You have to have a balance between the enforcement and science, and we don't have that in the Pacific. The problem we're having is that we don't know how much the stocks are. I'll give you an example. The north-coast salmon has a wide-open fishery, and the south-coast salmon has been closed, basically, for ten years on sockeye. We have no test boat program on salmon that goes out and assesses the numbers to balance with the quotas.
Roe herring is done to open the fishery, and the timeframe is only done a little bit before you do roe herring and a little bit after. We used to be a charter boat in the original roe herring, back in the seventies, when it first got going. We used to start way before the roe herring got going. We went through the whole roe herring cycle, and we went until they fell off the map, until there was almost nothing. Then we knew exactly where some of the points of impact were.
We don't do that any more. Almost as soon as the roe herring is over, it's over. Enforcement does do a good job; the problem is that they have no science to go there. You can't go and tell them we have a problem here. If an enforcement issue comes up, they can't really prove their own charge.