I think I'm reluctant to commit the department, but I think we've demonstrated that we are, in fact, open to hearing from fleets. We've got several examples of instances in which we've done that. We're not averse to having conversations with the fishing industry either as a whole or on a fleet-by-fleet basis for their particular needs around vessel length.
We do have some concerns about exemptions based on individual requests. When we have lack of compliance with the vessel-length rules, it's harvesters themselves in the fleet who bring these lack-of-compliance cases to our attention. Harvesters have concerns about individual exemptions. We would be more than open to having conversations with fleets on whether or not the current vessel rules are appropriate in today's fishery or whether they need to be revisited. This includes matters such as the stern extensions and whether there is an argument to be made based on the nature of the fishery today that temporary removable extensions are prudent and safe to be used in fisheries.
Yes, we're always open to those kinds of things but definitely reluctant to do so on an individual case-by-case basis because of the controversy that this creates within fleets.