I think it's important to note that certainly not all fisheries are equal. We have many fisheries that have 100% at-sea observer coverage. We have very good data coming out of those fisheries, as well as very recent stock assessments.
Then in other cases, in stock assessments, perhaps we might have missed one. In other cases, perhaps we don't have 100% at-sea observers. Perhaps we have some other method to get that catch information: perhaps hail-in and hail-out reports, dockside monitoring and/or different percentages of at-sea observer coverage.
That's all based on us as a department working with harvesters to determine what is feasible. One hundred per cent at-sea observer coverage is not feasible across all of our fisheries, especially for small boat operators, so we have to figure out which tools work in which fisheries.
That's why I think you see, in some cases, some gaps, but I guess it's important to note that while there are some gaps—and we recognize that—we're working to improve that situation. We do have instances and very good examples of good, reliable data coming into the department to further augment the information coming from science.