Well, as they say, the idea behind moving towards 100% marking of hatchery production, not proposing additional production but simply marking 100% of what is produced, would provide those additional identifiable fish to be available for harvest. It could make a much clearer distinction between wild and hatchery fish than currently exists, and thereby allow opportunity for a harvest in areas where some of those stocks of concern do appear or it's very clear that those stocks of concern are not present. The idea behind having opportunity and access for the public fishery is critical.
The main areas affected by the chinook restrictions are the south coast of British Columbia. That's the main population base. It affects perception and understanding about fish in fisheries and the ability for all number of public fishery participants, whether they are guides or charter operators. Operators, those who benefit from fishing tourism, are all affected by opportunity and access. Therefore, where possible to provide that opportunity on marked fish, so much the better.