For our witnesses who are here, I want to first of all say thank you very much for your input.
I guess the concern I have is that the scope of this idea is limited right now to the Fisheries Act. I'll give you an example.
We're dealing with reclamation and remediation projects, such as an oil sands project, which may or may not actually involve a river or a lake. I'll use the example of the Kearl project in northern Alberta, which was a naturally tar-bottomed, small, shallow pond that might have had a number of aquatic species in it, but not any fish any greater than perhaps a stickleback.
Instead of actually having habitat banking in place to restore it in an area where there's not a lot of human activity, we could have restored it to its natural state, which is required by all the environmental legislation both federally and provincially, and we could have had an enhanced offset by enhancing a fishery or perhaps purchasing some land for sage grouse somewhere else, not near the project.
I'm wondering about this. Is the Fisheries Act actually the right place for this? Is the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act a better place for it?
Mr. Gibson, go ahead.