Yeah.

And you see it rampant online of people saying that, and it created a level of uncomfort and distrust for the co-managers that, hey, we're seeing posts on social media, and even before that on some of the fishing web pages and forums of the recreational anglers saying, "Hey, d- don't tell the fish checker anything.

The only thing you got is what's dead in your boat.

That's the only thing you tell 'em." Well, that dockside sampling was used to put inputs into FRAM, which is the Fisheries Regulation Assessment Model.

That's the core model that they use to map out what our sub-legal encounters should be for each area, what our unmarked encounters should be for each area.

And so by people going back and telling them, "Hey, I didn't catch anything", they're then putting that into FRAM, and FRAM's making an assumption that only thing they catch there is legal fish.

So if, when they started managing on sub-legal encounters, the number that FRAM would spit out for what it thought our sub-legal encounters should be was and is way lower than what's probably going on in reality.

Do you mind walking me through, like, what the average angler doesn't know about the North of Falcon process and how it actually works from your perspective?

Why don't you talk about that? What are your members doing to modernize their programs and teaching models for a changing economy? And where do you think they currently stand?

Well, thanks for the question, Sean.

And, you know, any question that starts with universities deserve more credit is a question that I strongly agree with.

So I want to say we're off to a good start today.

Outstanding journalism happening on the podcast.

Let me tell you, I belong to the most endangered species in 2025, which is the species of optimists.

And I'm optimistic for a couple of reasons.

How do your presidents think about those within their own institutions?