The answer is yes.
One of the shortcomings of Canadian environmental protection laws is that we fail to incorporate the cost or the harm associated with the activity. What that means for private companies that act on the ground is that the water is free, the air is free, and the land is largely free. Sure, there are royalty schemes, but in no way are any current royalty schemes developed to incorporate the risk posed to the environment and the cost to society of the degradation that occurs. Again, fairly straightforward models are being developed and applied in the United States and other jurisdictions, which incorporate the cost to society in terms of development and require the private actor to pay. This is after the fact that we'd like to see a more proactive approach taken to progressive laws on the ground. One example is in other jurisdictions they apply the “polluter pays principle” to ensure that those who profit from activities that harm the environment pay for the consequences.