My understanding, based on our audit, is that the answer would be, yes, they did a full risk assessment. The specifics of individual species would be a question to ask the department.
Again, what did I go in and look at? We went in to see whether or not the department had looked at the entire program, at the full gamut—Coast Guard, wharves, science, fisheries management, species at risk, protected areas—and looked at all their climate risks. They did an analysis in 2005. They redid that analysis in 2012. They also developed a whole series of tools and research projects. Out of all the government departments, five actually looked at climate change from an entire mandate, including their assets.
That is the level we looked at. If you start asking me about specific species, you'll have to ask the department about that. Did they do a risk assessment? That's what we looked at. Was it a good risk assessment? Did it look at their entire program? Did they start adapting? Did they actually start developing tools? That's where this department did a good job, in both those areas—risk assessment and tools.