Thank you very much. You must have been out with my friend, Dean Werk, who's a great guy.
I would say it comes from the top. There has to be a psychological change in regard to direction right from the executive down. We know back in the 1990s to about 2013, gravel removal was a big deal, ostensibly for flood protection. We knew it was just for the construction industry. The stewardship groups would meet with the local and middle managers, and we'd say, “There's no benefit for flood protection. You're destroying a bunch of habitat.” They would say, “Yes, but we got this direction from Ottawa. Ottawa says to take the gravel out. It's a political thing.” There are no secrets really. It has to come from the top, and the senior folks have to support the line staff, the people out in the field.
We have something known as subsection 35.2(2), which is “ecologically significant areas”. This is a great thing. It was put into play about two years ago. Again, it relates to the stuff you're talking about, and when we talk to the senior middle guys in DFO, they're saying, “That's not going to happen for two or three years because the senior folks at the executive are not going to support something like that.”
It's a psychological thing that has to change in Ottawa, I think.