I will take a first stab at answering that question.
I think we'd have to get back to you with the exact percentages and so on, for precision, but broadly speaking I would say that the number of cut-off claims, which is what they're typically referred to as, or claims related to removal of lands from reserve historically, is actually a smaller category than the total amount outstanding as treaty land entitlement—in other words, where historic treaties have said there is a promise to create a certain amount of reserve land and that hasn't been carried through. They're a smaller category.
The issue most often is one that has to be resolved through a specific claim, so that first nations in British Columbia or Saskatchewan, for example, will file a claim saying there was land that was taken away from the reserve and it was, for whatever reason, an improper procedure—for example, an invalid surrender of lands. When that specific claim is negotiated and resolved, sometimes the parties will come to the conclusion that there will be a certain form of cash compensation, or sometimes there will be a decision to say, “Well, we want to now add some lands to reserve”.
When that is the result of a specific claim settlement, it turns into an addition to reserve, and the process is one under which you again go through these categories of working through the availability of the land, the purchase of the land, dealing with third-party interests, such as municipal issues and so on, and then ultimately setting it aside through an order in council.