Thank you.
I have just a couple of points about that.
First off, I think what I would say, at least in this case, is that I don't see a fundamental conflict in what the science is indicating and what the industry and other users are indicating they see. That's not always the case, but in this case I think there seems to be general agreement.
We certainly do use information that comes from fishers and the fishery throughout our whole assessment process, both in crab and in shrimp. The surveys for both species are actually done heavily in collaboration with industry. The main indices that we use for the northern part of the shrimp zones that we manage, and virtually all of the crab zones, are derived from surveys where industry have a very, very heavy role with us, including the design of the survey. So that's a very good input for us to be getting and a very good involvement.
Then, of course, we use a lot of fishery information. It's not just about the survey. The survey is a very important tool for us, but we also season and sprinkle into those results a lot of information that we collect from the fishery, which is obviously information that's generated by the activities of fishers. So that's another input.
Then, very importantly, in our assessment process, when we meet to condense all of the results that we've been able to get from our scientific analysis and bring folks together to review it in the peer review process, industry plays a role in those meetings with us. They have an expertise that we want to have in the room so that we can make sure that we're incorporating their view and knowledge of what they are seeing going on out there as well.