The fact is that there are adjustments in where our fishery offices are located. We have not laid off fishery officers; we have moved fishery officers.
We had a review of how to do our enforcement some time ago, over the last few years. It became pretty evident that having people on the wharves is one way. And we have to have what's called reactive enforcement, which is when you get out there to see what's going on—you look to see whether there is poaching, etc. We have to have education, because we need to ensure that people are aware of their obligations to be in compliance and that the public is aware of the legal activities and of illegal activities, so that they can inform us.
The more recent development is that we've been putting in major investigation capacity. We found that by comparing data sets from landings, from observers, and a variety of areas, we can start to see where to put our energy. Our enforcement is actually enhanced through that process.
I'm mindful of a couple of fisheries in which large-scale fraud was uncovered, wherein we had collusion between people involved in monitoring, control, and surveillance and the plants and fishermen. This is how we detect that and how we get the fines that are helping to deter that kind of activity.