I'm going to try the same tack as Mr. LeBlanc.
In fact, the situation is bad. Assuming what you're telling us is true, someone somewhere is not doing his job, or something is happening that is completely falsifying certain assessments.
Ultimately, I'd like to hear your opinion on assessment methods. There are various ways of doing it. I understand very well that a fisherman on his boat can easily assess what's going on at sea. That's one form of assessment. There are others. We know a lot of things about other places, but unfortunately it seems that our data on the ocean bottom are worth what they're worth. I'd like to hear your opinion on potential assessments. What makes an assessment of this type 100% reliable and others not?
I get the impression it's a combination. I get the impression that a good combination can really help facilitate matters and find the really valid orientation. Otherwise, it's like steering a ship: if you think there's no iceberg to the left and there ultimately is one, you hit it; it's automatic. I prefer there to be a kind of precautionary principle.
I'd like to know your opinion on the subject.