I think that's an excellent question, and as I said, I'm studying this in collaboration with DFO because everybody recognizes this problem. It's a problem we haven't scientifically solved, per se. I will point out that only some assets will move. Others will stay the same. For example, the Gully Marine Protected Area is an underwater canyon that will not move in a million years, so we were fine protecting that. There are certain habitat structures that will stay in place, but then, you're absolutely right, others will move. Industry recognizes this as well. It's adapting to this in a flexible manner. We're currently studying how it can adapt, how the fish species that we're studying adapt themselves, and then how we can build contingency into the system.
There's no appetite in DFO and internationally to make MPAs flexible in a way that the boundaries of the MPA move, so I think we'll have to work with static MPAs and buffer zones or other management tools, such as flexible critical-habitat designations that are moveable. I will point out that there's also a governance challenge here because some of these changes can happen very rapidly.
A very poignant example is the movement within a year of almost the entire right whale population on the east coast in the Bay of Fundy to the Gulf of St. Lawrence. In the Bay of Fundy they're well protected, but in the Gulf of St. Lawrence they're not. There were catastrophic consequences this year for that population. Governance has to react to these very rapid changes that we're now seeing on the water. It's the same on land, of course, but in the water it's particularly visible these days. A planning process needs tools to account for that, and those tools are currently being developed here and elsewhere.
