That's right.
When we talk about compatible activities, one of the things we look at is the nature of the activity that takes place. There are examples in other protected areas where we would allow a passive technology such as a lobster trap or a crab pot, because it doesn't really affect the ocean bottom. In other cases, we would restrict it to bottom trawling where it does have an effect, so the nature of the technology that is used is part of the analysis that we do when we determine what activities would be permitted and what activities would not.
In the specific case of the Shediac Valley, we have not proceeded to the Oceans Act MPA designation because we do know that more work is required in terms of understanding what the potential impacts are, and so right now it's staying as an area of interest and not necessarily proceeding as an MPA.