Given the staging of our various issues, I think we should establish a March 4 deadline for witnesses for the Big Bar, which I think was suggested by the chair. I think we agree with that on this side.
Then, for the rest of the Pacific salmon study, we could make it for March 11, to allow time to pause and recalibrate. What have we heard so far? Are there other witnesses we should talk to?
This would be preferable to holding to an initial stack of witnesses who may not be as valuable as other people we think about later. I would just put that out there. We could allow for that provision as we go forward.
Based on the urgency of Jaime's situation, and Madam Gill's interest as well, we need to set a date for our witnesses. To Mr. Fast's point, at the very least when the department staff comes in we can deal with Big Bar and perhaps the herring issue. They should be told in advance to be prepared to talk to us about those two things.