If you could give us some further written clarification on your pesticides and toxic chemical analysis, that would be useful to us. If you could make that available, it would be appreciated.
I'll make one comment before we go to our next questioner. When we did the study on northern cod, the one thing we found that was extremely consistent and, frankly, one of the great losses, due to political interference in the fisheries department—and I'm not making that as a partisan statement—was that disconnect between science and the fishermen on the ground, the person out in the boat who, like you, is an observer and has indepth knowledge of the resource, the climate, and the geography. Many of them have years and decades of information that's very important to your work as a scientist. I think that's been the great loss.
I don't make any apologies for politicians who have interfered in the process, and who have hindered and hurt the fishery by political decisions. But I do see that disconnect widening, and I'm wondering if you're seeing it coming back a bit, and if you have any advice on how we get back to having a good relationship between science and the fishers.
I realize that sometimes those of us in political life are problematic to that, but do you see a way to bring them closer together?