After ensuring the resource would be protected, the second goal of the DNR during negotiations was to improve the accuracy and transparency of data reporting. The current reporting process of the 2000 Consent Decree is broken and doesn’t provide meaningful transparency, nor does it result in data sharing throughout the course of the fishing season that allows progress toward a harvest limit to be monitored in a timely manner. In the proposed decree, data would be entered by fishers electronically and would be automatically and transparently shared with the State twice per month. Everyone would know at the same time how harvest is progressing toward the harvest limit. The Parties have all clearly committed to manage their respective fisheries so as not to exceed their harvest limit. Given the commitments of the Parties and the data reporting procedures agreed to within the proposed decree, exceeding a harvest limit in a meaningful way could only occur intentionally. Concerns about fishers failing to report are unfounded, as there are many ways to determine who is fishing, when, and where. In the proposed decree, the State would retain the authority to enforce provisions of the Decree and the Tribal Code. Should a fisher repeatedly fail to report his/her catch, the State could take enforcement action.