As I mentioned, the U.S. does not have this systematic approach that we're using.
We met with the science agency called the NSF a couple of weeks ago to see if they would be willing to fund American colleagues so that they could do the type of work we're doing. A number of other agencies, NOAA and EPA, are interested in doing this and using the Canadian model.
On the one hand, to answer your question, there is a Great Lakes Protection Fund, which last year had hundreds of millions of dollars. A lot of it went for salary support and things like that, but very clearly they had strongly ramped up their surveying, but it was only for one year. They have $50 million this year. I think they had $800 million last year, so it has been cut dramatically. Still, $50 million is a lot of money for restoration projects, and some of that is going to be dedicated to invasive species.
Currently, the U.S. is probably investing more. Ours is more stable, but at a lower level.
I certainly would like to see more, particularly for this type of surveillance. I don't think you can consider it a one-off when you have to come back repeatedly to see whether or not the high-risk areas are being colonized by new invaders. That takes money.