Yes. I think science comes first and science can point toward the state of the problem, if you think of it as a problem. It can also be used to consider potential solutions.
For example, Dr. Korman mentioned that they wrote that report, which would have also modelled the effects of different potential management actions on benefiting the steelhead. You can model or advise on what the potential options are and what are mostly likely to be effective. The minister then can take that information about the options and what the science is that is supporting those options, and then bring in these other factors that they have to consider, the trade-offs and the people who will be harmed by the management actions, for example.
As long as that's done in a transparent and open way so that people can see where the science enters and what other factors were being considered, then that would certainly be a process that I think a lot of people could sign up to.