Well, in our field we've had habitat regulations for decades, both at the federal level under the Migratory Birds Act and in each province, where there have been permitting for and prohibitions against diverting and draining wetlands for decades—really, since the 1940s. They have never been consistently applied. I believe the reason is that they cannot be enforced unless there is a robust incentive program built into the regulations, and such has not been the case.
We need to think about how to lead with incentives and not with regulations. From a land-owner perspective, you immediately create a real liability on their property, if you are contemplating an effort to enforce regulations that basically punish them for having burrowing owl habitat or wetlands on the property. It sends exactly the wrong message. We should hope to help them look at that habitat as an asset and something they should foster.
They know their land better than anybody in this room. They know every nook and cranny—where they can grow crops, where they can leave wetlands, where they can encourage the growth of wildlife. If we can empower that local and private land-owner knowledge on the landscape, we'll have some real effects, I think.