Last year, if I recall, the precautionary approach was not in place for that decision. There was advice. It doesn't come in as an absolute number; it comes in as a range, with what the risks are and so on with that advice. But it was not against the backdrop of moving the stock below conservation limits. The limits are set according to the size of population necessary to prevent long-term damage to the stock or danger that the stock will crash.
That's what they have now. They've defined the healthy, cautious, and critical zones. And the response this year was necessary to keep us out of the critical zone and move us from the cautious back towards the healthy. That wasn't there last year to help guide decisions--