Yes, it is.
I think there are a lot of really innovative ways to look at the non-timber values of our forests, and certainly carbon credits is one of them.
Another I think that's going on in the States is that insurance companies are looking to work with landowners to keep trees and to reforest for fire-smart interventions. I think the discussions we're having right now in Canada around natural infrastructure and how trees can help us with flooding and water quality and other issues that municipalities then end up paying for and that the communities are facing is another place where we're starting to expand our thinking around non-timber values and how those pieces could start to help build strategies that might allow us to manage our forests differently.
I think that all these things take some creative thinking, and also recognizing that we have some very different ecosystems across Canada, as you mentioned. In B.C., we have trees that can get quite old and that are storing huge amounts of carbon, and in other places, that's not so much the case. Trying to figure out how we use the best strategies in those places is very helpful.
I think the other one is linked to indigenous rights and indigenous interests. They are sometimes looking at having more of a tourism approach to having economic value in these places, or maybe other non-timber product approaches that might allow them to have economic value. I know another speaker mentioned a couple of other ideas. It does take some creative thinking and moving ourselves out of our typical boxes, and then helping to build those standards and markets.
You mentioned carbon credits. A lot of that just requires building some of the needed infrastructure so that people feel confident that the emission reductions that are being generated and used are credible.
I hope that helps.