but again one thousand nine hundred ninety nine i think it's a little different in the sense that given the obligation to consider present participation it's the most immediate year before the councils making the decision so again it's not like twenty seven twenty eight specifically fifty c f r three hundred six hundred point three twenty five see three little i quote a motive for making a particular allocation should be justified in terms of the objectives of the  look at what what needs did after the council made its decision and i think the answer is that the net staff concocted a rationale to support the counsel's analysis the rationale that they were prepared did not accurately reflect what the council bit yes didn't say that it took under the independent analysis of its own it said well the council did this the council did this the council did that this is why we're proving it was all friendly and in terms of what the council record i mean they have a lot of it as a practical matter they don't have the time to go back and review the entire record of accounts proceedings they have to rely on what staff tells so they get these grieving papers for instance there is that issues advisory this is that excerpt of record i believe t stepped over the bar you know getting back to that airs on the cattle growers the analogy now they stepped over the bar don't worry about i listen to the tapes the council easily stuck over by well they did merely saying that the council stepped off over the barges not make it so that you know they have all the responsibility i think they have to be able to rely on what their staffs tell they have to be able to have confidence that they're getting the straight scoop now suppose for instance in an october two thousand and one issues advisory instead of  what it might have done what it might have thought about what it did and whether there was a rational explanation in the record for what it did in particular the main concern that appellant has or that you're going to have his here is the decision not to vessels got to use nine hundred ninety nine and the pot catcher processors the larger vessels didn't and that again is discussed had great detail in the council deliberations and discussed in the final rule as well and the reality was was that there was very heated debate some health members were saying look we gave people a cutoff of ninety eight we've been concerned about these population and coming into the fishery here and we should stick by that because otherwise people are just going to start speculating and they're going to see that we're smaller part fishermen the park hatcher's moving into the gulf of alaska about this having an effect on local communities and both of those considerations are things that the council in news has to take into account under sixteen  talks about the issue of consistent participation or lack of consistent participation which actually doesn't dispute they say both sectors of the pot fishery did not have a consistent history here so that's totally keeping with what nuance was saying the reason was for what was doing hundred ninety nine the year that they were it was they had a pretty good idea you could if somebody could have figured out who was going to qualify who was going to qualify unless they include of the year that they were in on i think they could have figured that out there's when you look at the record there were i believe fifty three options various combinations of years requiring only one year the participation two years of participation and you can see the council really struggling trying to keep straight council really hash this out and they debated it and they decided that between these competing principles to include nine hundred ninety nine that's precisely our point that same debate had occurred with respect as your processor category maybe you would have had they would have had to confront those issues they would have had to confront the kind of in congress result that using ninety five ninety eight lesson of that's of the last fish in one nine hundred ninety six and exclu had a bigger is a debate and they resolved it on the record in the open so people knew why they came to a decision you can't look at this record and figure out why they didn't create the same result the cat pockets or process that the government had to keep coming back to this well they had warned focus they're concerned about people who because of the american fisheries act are going to be cut out after ninety ninety eight and will for the first time in one hundred ninety nine be looking around for some place to fish with the possibility of gaining credit  history that might be credited in a future access program so the and control that was basically saying don't expect to get in come in in one thousand nine hundred ninety get anywhere that doesn't apply in this situation here we have vessels that were articulated and and identified the economic dependence criteria they said in order to be considered economically dependent on this issue you have to fifteen two years and have harvested three hundred thousand pounds in each of those years ninety six to ninety nine you know they're still for your period the same number of vessels would have gotten would have been no difference whatsoever so there's this fear of this big influx of effort is just not there but what would happen is that you would have had this recent regulations in terms of when they have to make a decision it's a little bit like a decision before this court