I do believe HADD should be reinstated. I think there's some work to be done under the regulations that can incentivize fish habitat conservation.
One of the things I find remarkable is industries like farming and forestry have more restrictions on fish habitat than the fishing industry, which is interesting.
I'm thinking back to the Species At Risk Act, where there are conservation agreements and there are ways of protecting species at risk across the landscape. I think there can be a lot more work in terms of understanding cumulative impacts, knowing where habitat has been altered, particularly if it's not a man-made or human-made drainage ditch, understanding at that landscape level where those impacts have been authorized. In that way, at a biological level, we could do much more around conservation of freshwater fish, in particular.
I have to say my expertise and my background is in marine fish, so I may not be able to speak as articulately around freshwater habitat, but I do think there's a willingness across many stakeholders to work together. Nobody wants to destroy fish habitat. How do we do it in a way that is not a regulatory burden but is a stewardship perspective? I think that's quite possible.