That's very correct. Canada actually was an advocate to include forests on a voluntary basis under the Kyoto Protocol. It's very true that this year, in 2006, all parties to the protocol need to decide whether they include or whether they do not.
The Canadian Forest Service and NRCan are actually wrapping up the analysis of whether our forests are a net source or a net sink, and then policy options will go to ministers for consideration in the fall plan, if that all stays on track. From our perspective, there are several concerns.
One is that the whole forest question is really seen as somewhat of a side issue, yet it warrants its own examination.
Second, whether forests and forest ecosystems are a net source or a net sink, we feel that practices and conservation need to be incentivized under our approach to climate change. We feel it's somewhat of a moot point, because cars emit, and of course they're included; energy sources emit, and of course they're included. We feel that it actually needs to be included.
There's an interesting point on that, if I might digress for a moment. As one moves further north, the trees are very important, but actually the majority of the carbon sequestration is actually in the wetlands and the peatlands. It's very interesting to look at this from the total ecosystem perspective.