I think, if we went back to that—I'm assuming you're saying there would also be a reduction in the number of lobsters on the bottom—it just wouldn't be good for the local economy or the fishermen or whatever. If we returned to LFA 34, which is all I want to speak to, and to where and how much we landed in, say, the 1970s and early 1980s, unless we changed our whole method of marketing lobsters, it would be pretty detrimental.
Right now, I think our average catch per licence-holder in LFA 34 is somewhere around 50,000 to 53,000 pounds per licence-holder. That's on average. If you go back 20 years, it was probably in the low 30,000s. So it wouldn't bode well if you had such a dramatic drop, if I'm understanding you right, unless you did some kind of enhancement on the marketing where you achieved a much higher price for quality and stuff like that. That could somewhat offset the downturn in catches, certainly, but it would be very concerning if over a certain number of years the lobsters returned just to where they used to be, in 50 fathom and shoaler. That would simply be an indication that something was awry.