Thanks for the question.
I did touch on this briefly in the presentation. Specifically, what comes out of that ATIP—and of course, these are not my words; this is what was revealed by DFO employees—is that, first of all, the chair, who is a DFO employee, said that he was concerned that the scientific integrity of the process had been impaired. There are documents revealing that the assistant deputy minister's office gave a directive to modify some key points related to allowable harm. Also, DFO management—not DFO science, and this is the critical piece again—created its own run timing model.
First of all—and you need to be a bit of a geek on this stuff—they could not get the model to converge. There's your first red flag. The second red flag was that the model looks like this, and essentially what the model says is that there are no steelhead in the Fraser River until September 1. I have pictures of steelhead that were killed hundreds of kilometres up the Fraser in August two years ago.
Again, if you don't like the science, you make up your own. I believe they're still using their science to brief the minister, even though that science was thrown out through the CSAS process.