There have been a number of studies on this. They're both important, but as I think I mentioned earlier, there are area-sensitive species, such as woodland caribou and sage grouse, that absolutely need areas that are off limits to industrial development. These are large areas. It's the one area of conservation where governments have failed in their land use policies and failed to act.
The best management practice, if you wish, is no industrial development, no industrial-scale harvest, in their ranges. The oil and gas industry in Alberta tried for decades with the caribou. I sat on the Alberta Caribou Committee advising the deputy minister in Alberta on caribou, and they just came to the conclusion that none of those best management practices were working. We needed areas set aside.
It's not that governments can't do it. I worked on the Hay-Zama, for example, working with oil and gas, the first nations, and the government. They're out of there by 2017. They made a decision. They made a commitment. We had a process. It wasn't government-led, but it was government-facilitated, and the neighbourhood, if you wish, came to the conclusion that oil and gas was not compatible with saving that wetland complex. Oil and gas was allowed to produce in the less sensitive areas, but only up to a certain point, and then they're gone.
We need to be looking at similar things for such species as sage grouse and caribou. As I say, best management practices are only part of the puzzle, not all of it.