The issue is not only the TAC. We went through this in 1989-1990. The resource was jeopardized in 1989-1990 with 130 fishers. In cooperation with the Department's scientists, fishers reinvested in research. Thus we were able to rapidly increase the resource. It was far more abundant than it had ever been before, but the fishers did not reap the benefits. As soon as the resource became available, it was shared.
We invested in the fisheries, we behaved responsibly and then we ended up paying for having done that. The Department used the resource to meet its own obligations. If it managed the groundfish resource badly or if actions of that kind have meant that there is less available, that does not mean that others should have to deal with it. It is fine to set quotas, but if there is not enough to go around, then that is all there is.
As Mr. Scantland was saying, we go through the same thing every year. Harvesting plans are announced at the last minute, the last second. It might be a better idea to plan over a two- or three-year period. In any case, if there is not enough of the resource to go around, we will still be facing the same problem.