On the first one, when I say that recreational fishing, at least on the Pacific coast, cannot be considered in isolation and cannot be considered without looking at the broader context that includes commercial fishing, virtually all of the fisheries resources on Canada's Pacific coast are fully subscribed. Any time there's a change to one sector with respect to access and allocation, the other sectors are affected. I think the committee needs to bear that in mind when doing its deliberations.
With respect to the second point that market forces are increasingly bringing pressure for full catch accountability, that is one of the hallmarks of sound resource management. What we've experienced in the commercial fishery is that market forces can come to bear very quickly and very rapidly, and you can get behind the eight ball very quickly. We've seen it in other fisheries. We've been fortunate in the halibut fishery and the groundfish fisheries, as Mr. Kamp alluded to; he was involved in that. Significant changes were made in all the groundfish fisheries and introduced in 2006. You have to stay ahead of the curve, and I think B.C. needs to make sure it doesn't get left behind.
Third, there are ways to solve allocation disputes that will get government out of the middle. Government just has to set the rules, step back, and basically monitor the quota, as they do now, and where it's moving, as they do already in the commercial fisheries. It creates a win-win situation, where people will voluntarily choose and make arrangements. You'll get win-win rather than one party or the other always losing.