It very much depends on the species. Some of them surprise you. They certainly surprise me, chairing a group of 60 people for a five- or six-day period.
Some assessments go through very quickly. I'll simply ask for a consensus through a general nodding of heads that there is a feeling that this species is endangered. Sometimes there are circumstances that have made it pretty clear to the committee that endangerment is the case. Other cases require extensive discussion, discussions extending four, five, and six hours on a single species. We might go through multiple motions on status before we achieve one that receives the two-thirds majority required.
There are also occasions on which I feel, as chair, that discussion appears not to be leading towards a scientifically defensible conclusion. Under such circumstances we will withdraw the report, because often it's reflective of deficiencies in the report, either in the communication of the information or in the quality of the information, and a better or a more defensible report would result in a more appropriate assessment and a more defensible assessment. That's another course of action that I'm not afraid to take, and have taken.