Yes, that is correct. All treaty people automatically have a right to a GHL, so it's almost one and the same. I think the Member related to a different perspective, from between the Inuit and other aboriginal people; I am not certain it's the case. The Dene, for instance, and Metis, I know, and the Inuvialuit, for that matter, may differ. At least with the Dene and Metis, if they don't make the regulation and they have no part in the management of the resource, then they have little regard for the laws and the quotas that are set by this government. Whereas, now that we are increasing the area of co-management and local management, and local control and approaches to harvesting of wildlife is increasingly the way we do business, there is no difficulty. As far as I know, people see it as a right because it's like a right to live. They have a right to hunt moose and caribou and get fish as long as they are alive.
Where it becomes a privilege, I think, is when you mismanage it. Then you're right, I guess people feel like it's a privilege because they know it's dying out and it's not going to be around much more.
So it's integrated with the sense that, just as much as it's your right to harvest wildlife, it's equally your right, your responsibility and your duty to manage it so that you can always exercise that right, forever. I don't think it's any different, but in this part of the world, anyway, that's been the approach and the view. So, just some additional comments. Thank you.