I know the case. We've discussed the one that you're speaking of, and it is a priority to get it solved. We've offered some options to that particular group, and I'm not sure we've found the right option for land swaps and so forth.
Just to complete my thought, if you don't mind, we have an internal debate between the stewards and the developers and improvers on the extent to which we can be flexible with these lands for these different kinds of uses. It's a constant, ongoing internal challenge function. I just want the committee to know that this is an active debate on every file within the NCC, and in the debate between the planners versus the developers and the land managers, they usually have to come to creative solutions to allow new uses.
I'll take away your comment, and we could actually talk about that offline, and I can update you.