I certainly tried at the Atlantic mackerel advisory committee meeting to present the position of the department, based on the science advice and based on what we felt, as fisheries managers, could be an appropriate approach with respect to the fishery. All options were indeed on the table as a result of the science that we had before us.
Interestingly, the immediate response from some harvester associations with respect to that recommendation for a total allowable catch was for a considerably higher TAC, in some cases, than the previous year, so I do question whether my messaging was succinct enough. However, it was. I can provide you with my speaking notes, which I read verbatim, so I'm not sure about the disconnect with respect to that particular meeting.
We do encourage informal conversations all the time, and in fact we meet frequently with the major harvester associations. There's that type of communication. There's ongoing work with respect to science, and where we can find more ways to collaborate, we do have tools for that. Whether it's section 10 under the Fisheries Act or some of the sampling programs that science has, we do have tools to really collaborate with industry there. That's certainly ongoing.
We're going into the next AMAC meeting in the first quarter of 2023. I really hope industry will come forward with ideas. In the event this fishery doesn't reopen, do they have ideas with respect to further collaboration around science and that type of thing?
There is the possibility that we may be in that situation. Again, I don't want to prejudge. We haven't seen the science assessment yet, nor have we consulted, but there is that.