I guess there are a couple of things to point out.
First, the regulatory regime that's in place for aquaculture today will continue into the future. Environmental assessments of aquaculture sites will be conducted in two different ways.
Again, we always have to distinguish British Columbia versus—I don't want to be pejorative—the rest of the country. It's a verbal shorthand; take it for that. Essentially, in British Columbia, the assessment of the environmental implications of all aquaculture sites will be considered as part of the regulatory process, and so the provisions that historically have been addressed by the provincial and federal environmental assessment processes in British Columbia will be addressed through the Pacific aquaculture regulatory process that's in place there now. Those will not be changed. Those have not been changed, rather, by the Fisheries Act.
On the east coast, where we are getting into environmental assessments of aquaculture sites, essentially what will happen in the future going forward is the provincial process remains in place. To the extent there are federal interests in some of the projects, insofar as where they're located, the act would be triggered. “Triggered” is not really the right term now; it would be applied. The manner in which the assessments are undertaken in the future will be somewhat different.
As you probably are aware, under the Environmental Assessment Act, aquaculture is not listed as one of the projects on the schedule, so it's our expectation that the majority of environmental assessment work will be done via the province in question, depending on where it is. We will work through the existing permitting mechanisms that are in place to address the federal obligations.