Well, in some ways it would come down to the need. What we've been advocating for is the upfront, large-scale planning, which looks at the entire area, both at areas where it's appropriate to carry out activity and areas where it's not appropriate; and looks at what the thresholds are for the region as a whole, or the overall capacity of the region to sustain industrial activity; and then manages activity within those limits. Then it becomes much easier.
That's why we're advocating for the large-scale planning so that we're not looking project by project all the time. This does exist in Alaskan waters, where there are processes in place to do strategic environmental assessments and to set overall thresholds. Now, in Alaska they don't set spatially explicit areas, which we see as a weakness, but there are tools in place across the Arctic to do that in a more careful manner.