That's what I'm having trouble understanding. Eventually, we'll get to the end of the assessment when the ecological consequences of this will have to be determined. Aren't the consequences significantly tied to your assumptions on the size of the population that could survive? Are you saying it's a massive population that could survive and cause these great ecological consequences, or is it a smaller population? I'm not quite sure I see that connection clearly in your report.
On October 16th, 2012. See this statement in context.