I'm not asking about the DFO. I'm saying that if we take the new principle that's being proposed, that there should be no net loss of habitat whatsoever, then moving a pond from its natural location to install it in a new location will result in the loss of terrestrial habitat. It seems to me that this would mean that development could not occur because no matter what we do, if we put a hydro-electric project in somewhere, it's going to displace natural habitat. If we're looking at the entire territory of Canada, there's no place for that habitat to go where it won't destroy other habitat. So what am I missing?
On April 16th, 2013. See this statement in context.