Our act allows us to seize an animal that we have reason to believe is in distress, and our definition of distress allows us to deal with animals that may have been involved in fighting. Certainly the impact is much less on penalties and on the ability to share that information. If somebody is convicted of a provincial statute and receives a prohibition from owning animals, that prohibition is only good while they're in the province of British Columbia, not if they move to Alberta.
We're seeing that currently with a number of individuals who have been charged with offences. They have this penchant for travelling back and forth between B.C. and Alberta, and, as far as I'm aware, now Saskatchewan. Unfortunately, although some of the history travels with them, the fact that they've been charged with an offence doesn't have an impact in another jurisdiction.