I would say that if a man-made habitat proves to be equal to the natural habitat, and in my experience it's often permitted by at least the old Fisheries Act as a replacement for habitat that cannot be otherwise restored, such as in the dewatering of lakes, then it should be permitted. I would counter that by saying, though, that my experience is that even habitats designed by DFO scientists were often pretty inadequate.
With respect to fish, I think the concern should be the long-term future of fish populations. I don't think the death of individual fish is of concern here. In my view, the mandate of the Fisheries Act and this committee is to see that it is truly sustainable, that my grandchildren can come back and expect to rely on the same degree of fisheries for food, or recreation, or subsistence that we can today. There are other acts, presumably, that will counter that. This is not the mining act. It is not the agriculture act. Your charge, in my view, is to see that our fisheries are sustainable, whatever it takes.