Thank you for that.
We have done a lot of really good science and we have learned a lot about the ecology, the biology, diseases and migration. We have learned a lot and we have done a lot of good science.
My point is, science that helps inform decision-making around things that are actionable is what is needed. We know there are a lot of hatchery fish being put into the ocean. That's a fact. We need science that can better understand, if we change the number of hatchery fish that are put into the ocean, what is the effect that would likely have on the growth of chinook and the survival of chinook? It would help inform the decisions of how many less fish or what fish should be released into the ocean.
That's a complex question, but science can help inform, essentially, the trade-offs: If we do this, what are we likely to get from that decision?
Science that helps inform trade-offs and decision-making is what I mean by actionable science. That is really important science.
To David Curtis's point, science that is really good for helping understand salmon ecology and biology, while fascinating and important, may not provide the levers for us to pull to make a difference, if that makes sense, sir.