I think when you get to something like someone wading in a stream, streams are dynamic and they create their own habitat over time if they have proper watershed conditions, so that's easily recoverable. Riding an ATV through a stream is another matter.
But I think the examples we tried to show were that there are many clear situations right now where there's significant infilling, several square metres, even several hundred square metres of infilling, where that habitat is absolutely eliminated. Those types of projects aren't currently being compensated for by DFO or by proponents.
That's a serious concern. We would like to address those situations where there's unambiguous residual harm, and the more dynamic types of habitat shifts, I think, are another matter.