Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to all three of you for being here today.
I'd like to continue along Monsieur Choquette's second line of questioning with regard to local-level habitat banking and the use of the no-net-loss guideline.
Mr. Penner, I'd like to know a bit more about how this process works in practice on the ground, because I think that local-level habitat banking, or habitat banking of all kinds, is just generally a great idea. You've mentioned that it was used numerous times. You gave the example of the tree removal guidelines. I assume this means that if someone is digging up an old tree, they have to plant x number of new ones somewhere else. I'm wondering, first of all, if that's the only use for local-level habitat banking in Winnipeg or if there are other examples you could give us.
Also, I'm wondering if you can see urban areas like Winnipeg or other areas benefiting when natural areas further away are being damaged and the project proponents, the industry or the people doing the damage, want to or have to remediate elsewhere. Can you see urban centres benefiting from that type of habitat banking? It would not be just local, but a little bit further away, and then there's benefiting in urban areas.