Page 1 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

September 19, 2014

Congressional Requesters 

Fish Stock Assessments: Prioritization and Funding

According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the Department 

of Commerce, U.S. marine fisheries contribute over $100 billion annually to the American 

economy and provide recreational fishing opportunities to millions of Americans.

1 To continue 

enjoying these benefits, NOAA manages marine fish stocks to ensure their sustainable use for 

current and future generations.

2

Eight regional fishery management councils are responsible for fisheries conservation and 

management in specific geographic regions of the country. In addition, six NMFS regional 

fisheries science centers are responsible for conducting fish stock assessments for certain fish 

stocks in their geographic regions. The regional fishery management councils use NMFS’ fish 

stock assessments as a key tool for setting annual catch limits to help manage fish stocks. 

According to NMFS, fish stock assessments can be expensive and time-consuming, and 

therefore, NMFS cannot assess every stock each year. Consequently, setting priorities to 

determine how often fish stocks should be assessed is important to ensure the efficient use of 

resources. 

Specifically, NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 

is responsible for fishery conservation and management. As part of its responsibility, NMFS 

conducts fish stock assessments to estimate the size of the population of a fish stock. NMFS 

also conducts fish stock assessments to examine whether a stock is overfished and provide 

support for management measures, such as limits on how many fish can be caught annually, 

among other things.

There are two primary levels at which fish stock assessments can be conducted. The most 

comprehensive level is known as a benchmark assessment, which may involve reviewing 

multiple data sources and conducting new analyses and require many months to a year or more 

to complete. A more streamlined, less time-consuming and costly level assessment is an update 

assessment, which updates established benchmark assessment calculations using additional 

data. The level of assessment needed for a particular fish stock is determined as part of 

regional fish stock assessment priority setting processes involving NMFS’ regional fisheries 

science centers, NMFS’ regional management offices, and the regional fishery management 

councils, among others.

 1

Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Fisheries Economics of the United 

States, 2011, NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-128 (Silver Spring, MD: December 2012).

2

A “fish stock” refers to either one species or a complex of comparable species managed as an entity in a geographic 

area. Throughout this report, the term fish stock is used to mean one fish species or a fish stock complex.
Page 2 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

You asked us to review issues related to NMFS’ fish stock assessments. This report (1) 

identifies differences in the number and frequency of fish stock assessments conducted by 

NMFS’ regional fisheries science centers and the causes of those differences, (2) identifies how 

NMFS sets priorities for conducting fish stock assessments, (3) determines the funding NMFS 

receives annually for conducting fish stock assessments and related activities, and (4) 

determines how NMFS makes funding decisions to support fish stock assessments and related 

activities. This report formally transmits the briefing slides presented to your staff on June 19, 

2014 (see enclosure), and provides additional details.

To identify differences in the number and frequency of fish stock assessments conducted by 

NMFS’ fisheries science centers, we reviewed and analyzed fish stock assessment data from 

NMFS’ Species Information System database for calendar years 2005 through 2013, the years 

for which data was available. We interviewed knowledgeable officials about the reliability of that 

data and performed manual and electronic checks to identify any data limitations. We 

determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. To identify the causes of the 

differences in the number and frequency of fish stock assessments across regions, we 

interviewed knowledgeable agency officials. To identify how NMFS sets priorities for conducting 

fish stock assessments, we reviewed agency policies, procedures, guidance, and other 

documentation, and we interviewed NMFS’ headquarters officials responsible for overseeing the 

fish stock assessment prioritization process and officials involved with the prioritization process 

in three NMFS fisheries science centers and three regional fishery management councils, 

selected for geographic representation. To determine the funding NMFS receives annually for 

conducting fish stock assessments and related activities, we reviewed the most recent 6-year

period of fish stock assessment funding information and documents for fiscal years 2008 

through 2013, and we interviewed knowledgeable officials about the reliability of that data. We 

determined that the funding data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes. To determine how 

NMFS makes funding decisions to support fish stock assessments and related activities, we 

reviewed NMFS’ procedures and other documents on how the agency makes funding decisions 

and interviewed knowledgeable agency officials. 

We conducted this performance audit from June 2013 to September 2014 in accordance with 

generally accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and 

perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained 

provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

In summary, we found the following:

• Differences exist in the number and frequency of regional fish stock assessments. For 

example, our analysis of NMFS data from 2005 through 2013 found that the Alaska 

Fisheries Science Center conducted 467 fish stock assessments, the Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center conducted 158 assessments, and the Pacific Islands Fisheries 

Science Center conducted 25 assessments and jointly participated in 17. According to 

NMFS officials, these differences are due to several factors, such as regional differences 

in the types of fish stock assessments conducted, data limitations, data complexity,

workload, staff capacity, and fish stock biology and status.3

 3

The need for frequent fish stock assessments may vary depending on biological characteristics of the fish stock or 

the level of fishing pressure. For example, some stocks with low natural mortality rates change slowly, so they require 

less frequent assessments, and some stocks that have been overfished may need more frequent assessments. 

For instance, the majority of 

the fish stock assessments completed by the Alaska Fisheries Science Center between 
Page 3 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

2005 and 2013 were update assessments, which are less time-consuming to conduct. In 

addition, according to NMFS officials, the Alaska Fisheries Science Center was able to 

complete more assessments because, in part, they have access to high-quality data 

covering long time periods for many of the fish stocks they assess. According to NMFS 

officials, the complexity of data sources also plays a role in how long it takes to complete 

stock assessments. For example, when fish catch data come from many states, it takes 

more time to assemble, review, and analyze the information. Data sources are the least 

complex in Alaska and the West Coast and are particularly complex in the Southeast 

and Northeast, according to NMFS officials.

• NMFS’ regional fisheries science centers collaborate with regional partners to set 

regional priorities for fish stock assessments, and these regional partners have 

significant flexibility in setting fish stock assessment priorities in their regions, according 

to NMFS officials. Furthermore, our review of three regional fish stock assessment 

priority setting processes found that there was no standardized approach for how 

regional fisheries science centers set targets for the fish stock assessment level (i.e., 

how comprehensive the assessment needs to be) and frequency (i.e., how often the 

assessment needs to be updated) to help set priorities. However, NMFS issued a draft 

protocol to help standardize regional fish stock assessment prioritization processes in 

February 2014. Key features of this draft protocol include establishing an objective, 

standardized, and quantitative approach for setting regional fish stock assessment 

priorities and developing a national reporting system to compile and track the results of 

regional prioritization decisions.

• A major source of annual funding for fish stock assessments and related activities is the 

Expand Annual Stock Assessment budget line. In fiscal year 2013, NMFS received $64 

million for this budget line, which supports ongoing activities such as data collection, 

stock assessment modeling, staffing, and research to improve fish stock assessments. 

The Expand Annual Stock Assessment budget line has also been used to address 

critical regional needs. For example, in fiscal year 2010, NMFS provided additional funds 

to the Southeast Fisheries Science Center to initiate a new data collection effort offshore 

from the South Atlantic states and to hire additional assessment staff and biological 

technicians to process sample data. Funding for fish stock assessments and related 

activities also partially comes from several other budget lines. According to a senior 

NMFS official, the agency does not separately track how much of the funds from each of 

these budget lines are used solely to support stock assessments and related activities.

• NMFS considers several factors in making funding decisions to support fish stock 

assessments and related activities. For example, NMFS allocates funding based on past 

funding amounts and makes adjustments to address national fish stock assessment 

priorities and needs, critical gaps identified through program reviews, and needs 

identified in regional fish stock prioritization processes. According to NMFS’ draft 

prioritization protocol, decisions about allocating national resources between regions can 

be guided indirectly by the results of regional fish stock assessment prioritization. For 

example, NMFS’ draft prioritization protocol establishes a new quantitative scoring 

system to rank regional fish stock assessment priorities that may allow NMFS to 

determine the extent to which the regional fisheries science centers can meet their fish 

stock assessment needs with available resources.
Page 4 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Agency Comments 

We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Commerce for review and comment. The 

Department of Commerce provided technical comments that were incorporated, as appropriate.

---------------

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional committees, the Secretary 

of Commerce, the NOAA Administrator, and other interested parties. In addition, the report is

available at no charge on the GAO website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff members have any questions concerning this report, please contact me at 

(202) 512-3841 or fennella@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations 

and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report 

were Stephen D. Secrist (Assistant Director), Leo Acosta, Mark Braza, Joseph Capuano, John 

Delicath, Richard Johnson, Dan Royer, and Arvin Wu.

Anne-Marie Fennell

Director, Natural Resources and Environment

Enclosure 
Page 5 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

List of Requesters

The Honorable Marco Rubio

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

United States Senate

The Honorable Thad Cochran

United States Senate

The Honorable Kay R. Hagan

United States Senate

The Honorable Mary L. Landrieu

United States Senate

The Honorable Jeff Sessions

United States Senate 

The Honorable Richard Shelby

United States Senate

The Honorable David Vitter

United States Senate

The Honorable Roger F. Wicker

United States Senate
Page 6 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Enclosure

Briefing on Fish Stock Assessments: Prioritization and Funding

Fish Stock Assessments: 

Prioritization and Funding

Briefing to 

Congressional Requesters

June 19, 2014

For more information, contact Anne-Marie Fennell at (202) 512-3841 or fennella@gao.gov Page 1
Page 7 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Introduction

• According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. marine 

fisheries support over one million full and part-time jobs, contribute over $100 billion to the 

American economy annually, and provide recreational fishing opportunities to millions of 

Americans. To continue enjoying these benefits, NOAA manages marine fish stocks to 

ensure sustainable use for current and future generations.

• NOAA's National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is responsible for fishery conservation 

and management. As part of this responsibility, NMFS conducts fish stock assessments to 

• estimate the size (abundance) of a fish stock 

• examine whether a stock is overfished and provide support for management 

measures, such as limits on how many fish can be caught annually, among other 

things

• A “fish stock” refers to either one species or a complex of comparable species managed as 

an entity in a geographic area. Throughout this briefing, the term fish stock is used to mean 

one fish species or a fish stock complex.

Page 2
Page 8 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Introduction (cont.)

• Six NMFS regional fisheries science centers are responsible for conducting fish stock 

assessments for certain fish stocks in their regions, as shown in figure 1. 

• Eight regional fishery management councils are responsible for the conservation and 

management of the fisheries in their regions, as shown in figure 1. These management 

councils use NMFS’ fish stock assessments as a key tool for setting annual catch limits 

to help manage fish stocks. 

• Five NMFS regional management offices administer fisheries programs in their 

geographic locations, as shown in figure 1.

• According to NMFS, fish stock assessments can be expensive and time-consuming, 

therefore fisheries science centers cannot assess every fish stock each year. 

• Setting priorities to determine how often fish stocks should be assessed is important to 

ensure efficient use of resources.

Page 3
Page 9 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Introduction (cont.)

Figure 1: Locations of NMFS’ Fisheries Science Centers, NMFS’ Regional Offices, and the Regional Fishery Management Councils (RFMCs) 

Page 4
Page 10 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objectives

We were asked to review issues related to NMFS’ fish stock 

assessments. Our objectives were to

1. identify differences, if any, in the number and frequency of fish 

stock assessments conducted by NMFS’ regional fisheries 

science centers and the causes of any differences.

2. identify how NMFS sets priorities for conducting fish stock 

assessments.

3. determine the funding NMFS receives annually for conducting 

fish stock assessments and related activities.

4. determine how NMFS makes funding decisions to support 

fish stock assessments and related activities.

Page 5
Page 11 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Scope and Methodology

To address these objectives:

• We reviewed and analyzed data on fish stock assessments for calendar years 2005 through 2013 

from NMFS’ Species Information System database and interviewed knowledgeable officials about 

the reliability of that data. We determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes.

• We interviewed NMFS headquarters officials responsible for overseeing the fish stock 

assessment prioritization process and officials involved with the prioritization process in three 

NMFS fisheries science centers and three regional fishery management councils, selected for 

geographic representation.

• We reviewed fish stock assessment funding information and documents for fiscal years 2008 

through 2013 and interviewed knowledgeable officials about the reliability of that data. We 

determined that the data were sufficiently reliable for our purposes.

• We reviewed NMFS’ policies, procedures, guidance, and other documents on how the agency 

sets fish stock assessment priorities and makes funding decisions.

• We obtained comments from NMFS on the information in this briefing and incorporated their 

comments as appropriate.

Page 6
Page 12 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Summary of Findings

• Our analysis of NMFS’ data found that differences exist in the number and 

frequency of regional fish stock assessments, which, according to NMFS 

officials, is due to several factors, such as regional differences in the types of 

assessments conducted, data limitations, workload, and staff capacity. 

• According to NMFS officials, NMFS’ regional fisheries science centers 

collaborate with regional partners to set regional priorities for fish stock 

assessments and NMFS issued a draft protocol in February 2014 to help 

standardize regional fish stock assessment prioritization processes.

• According to NMFS officials, a major source of funding for fish stock 

assessments and related activities is the Expand Annual Stock Assessment 

budget line ($64 million in fiscal year 2013), but funding for these activities 

partially comes from several other budget lines. 

• According to a senior NMFS official, NMFS considers several factors in 

making funding decisions to support fish stock assessments and related 

activities and the results of NMFS’ draft prioritization protocol can indirectly 

guide funding decisions.

Page 7
Page 13 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Background 

• There are two primary “levels” at which fish stock assessments can be 

conducted. 

• The most comprehensive level is known as a “benchmark” 

assessment, which may involve reviewing multiple data sources and 

conducting new analyses and require many months to a year or more 

to complete.

• A more streamlined, less time-consuming and costly level that updates 

established benchmark assessment calculations using additional data 

is known as an “update” assessment. 

• The level of assessment for a particular fish stock is determined as part of 

regional fish stock assessment priority setting processes that involve 

NMFS’ regional fisheries science centers, NMFS’ regional management 

offices, and the regional fishery management councils, among others.

Page 8
Page 14 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Background (cont.)

• A fish stock that is subject to overfishing has a fishing mortality (harvest) rate that 

is too high to meet long-term sustainable catch level targets under current 

conditions. 

• A determination that overfishing has occurred recently does not necessarily 

mean that the stock has already experienced substantial reductions in fish 

stock size. 

• A fish stock that is overfished has been depleted to a degree that the fish stock’s 

capacity to meet long-term sustainable catch level targets is jeopardized. 

• In some cases overfishing is the main cause for depletion of the fish stock, 

but other factors can affect the abundance of a fish stock and lead to a NMFS 

designation of being overfished. These factors include abnormal levels of 

disease, extreme cycles of natural population fluctuations, habitat 

degradation, and environmental changes such as climate change, ocean 

acidification, and land-based pollution. 

Page 9
Page 15 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Background (cont.)

According to NMFS officials, NMFS developed a Fish Stock Sustainability 

Index (FSSI) in 2005.

• NMFS selected fish stocks in each region based on factors such as 

their economic importance to commercial and recreational fisheries 

and whether they had experienced overfishing or were overfished.

• Currently, 230 of the 481 fish stocks in federal fishery management 

plans are reported on the FSSI.

• These fish stocks represent more than 90 percent of the total U.S. 

commercial catch (by weight). 

• NMFS tracks whether these stocks are being overfished, whether 

overfishing is occurring, and the progress made, if any, in sustainably 

managing these fish stocks over time. 

Page 10
Page 16 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Differences in the Number and 

Frequency of Fish Stock Assessments

Our review of NMFS’ data found that from 2005 to 2013, the number of 

fish stock assessments conducted annually and in total has varied 

significantly among NMFS’ regional fisheries science centers.1For 

example, as shown in table 1:

• In 2013, the Alaska Fisheries Science Center conducted 60 

assessments and the Southeast Fisheries Science Center conducted 

18 assessments. 

• In total, the Alaska Fisheries Science Center conducted 467 fish stock 

assessments, the Southeast Fisheries Science Center conducted 158 

assessments, and the Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center 

conducted 25 assessments and jointly participated in 17 assessments.

1 

Benchmark and update assessments are counted equally as one assessment in our analysis.

Page 11
Page 17 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

Table 1: Number of Fish Stock Assessments Conducted by NMFS’ Fisheries Science Centers, 2005-2013

Page 12
Page 18 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

Our analysis of NMFS’ data found that from 2005 to 2013, the 

number of fish stocks that each of NMFS’ fisheries science 

centers is responsible for assessing and the number of those fish 

stocks that were assessed at least once varied significantly 

among NMFS’ fisheries science centers. For example, as shown 

in figure 2:

• The Northeast Fisheries Science Center is responsible for 50 

fish stocks and the Southeast Fisheries Science Center is 

responsible for 156.

• The Alaska Fisheries Science Center assessed 62 of its 65 

(95 percent) fish stocks and the Pacific Islands Fisheries 

Science Center assessed 10 of its 68 (15 percent) fish stocks. 

Page 13
Page 19 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

Figure 2: Number of Fish Stocks NMFS’ Fisheries Science Centers Are Responsible for Assessing and the Number Assessed 

and Not Assessed, 2005-2013 

Page 14
Page 20 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

Our analysis of NMFS’ data found that from 2005 to 2013, there 

were differences among NMFS’ fisheries science centers in the 

number of fish stocks assessed that were either on or off the 

FSSI list. For example, as shown in figure 3:

• The Alaska Fisheries Science Center assessed 100 percent of 

its fish stocks on the list and 27 out of 30 (90 percent) of its 

fish stocks that were not on the list.

• The Southeast Fisheries Science Center assessed 61 out of 

77 (79 percent) of its fish stocks on the list and 7 of 79 (9 

percent) of its fish stocks that were not on the list. 

Page 15
Page 21 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

Figure 3: Number of FSSI and non-FSSI Fish Stocks Assessed and Not Assessed by NMFS’ Fisheries Science Centers, 2005-2013

Page 16
Page 22 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

Our analysis of NMFS’ data found that from 2005 to 2013, some 

fish stocks were assessed much more frequently than others. 

For example, as shown in figure 4: 

• 200 of the 481 fish stocks that the NMFS’ fisheries science 

centers are responsible for assessing were never assessed. 

In contrast, 100 fish stocks were assessed between 4 and 9 

times.

• 33 stocks on the FSSI list were never assessed and 24 stocks 

not on the list were assessed between 4 and 9 times. 

Page 17
Page 23 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

Figure 4: Frequency of Fish Stock Assessments, 2005-2013

Page 18
Page 24 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

Our analysis of NMFS’ data found that from 2005 to 2013, there 

were significant differences in the frequency that fish stocks were 

assessed among NMFS’ fisheries science centers. For example, 

as shown in figure 5:

• The Alaska Fisheries Science Center assessed 35 of its 65 

fish stocks nine different times. In contrast, the Southeast 

Fisheries Science Center assessed 2 of its 156 fish stocks 

nine different times.

• The Alaska Fisheries Science Center never assessed 3 

stocks. In contrast, the Southeast Fisheries Science Center 

never assessed 88 fish stocks. 

Page 19
Page 25 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

Figure 5: Frequency of Fish Stock Assessments by Select NMFS’ Fisheries Science Centers, 2005-2013 

Page 20
Page 26 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

According to NMFS officials, several key factors individually or in combination account for 

the differences in the number and frequency of fish stock assessments, such as:

• Types of fish stock assessments – The number of benchmark and update fish stock 

assessments conducted, which require different amounts of time and effort, varies 

across regions. 

• Data limitations – Variations across regions exist in data collection costs, and data 

availability, quality, and timeliness. For example, in places where the fish stock’s 

habitat is complex, multiple surveys may be required to cover the geographic range of 

the fish stock. In addition, some regions have access to high quality data over long 

time periods while others do not. Furthermore, when fish catch data come from many 

states, it takes more time to assemble, review, and analyze the information. 

• Staff capacity – Differences exist in the number and skills of personnel available 

across regions.

Page 21
Page 27 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 1: Number and Frequency of Fish 

Stock Assessments

• Workload – The workload varies across regions for a variety of 

reasons. For example, the number of fish stocks, the number of 

species included in each stock, and the number and complexity 

of assessments that need to be conducted in each region varies. 

There are also differences in regional stock assessment 

processes. For example, conducting assessments in 

collaboration with international partners greatly extends the time 

and effort needed to complete an assessment. 

• Fish stock biology and status – The need for frequent fish stock 

assessments may vary depending on biological characteristics of 

the fish stock or the level of fishing pressure. For example, some 

fish stocks that have been overfished may need more frequent 

assessments.

Page 22
Page 28 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 2: Current Fish Stock Assessment 

Prioritization Process

According to NMFS officials, NMFS’ regional fisheries science centers collaborate with other 

partners to set regional priorities for fish stock assessments. Our review of three regional fish 

stock assessment priority setting processes found that: 

• NMFS’ regional fisheries science centers and regional fishery management councils are the 

key partners that establish regional priorities for fish stock assessments; 

• Regional partners have significant flexibility in setting fish stock assessment priorities in 

their regions;

• Regional partners do not employ a standardized method to quantitatively assess various 

factors, such as a fish stock’s economic importance, in prioritizing which fish stocks to 

assess; and

• NMFS’ regional fisheries science centers do not have a standardized approach for setting 

targets for the fish stock assessment level (how comprehensive the assessment needs to 

be) and frequency (how often the assessment needs to be updated) to help set priorities.

Page 23
Page 29 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 2: Proposed Fish Stock Assessment 

Prioritization Protocol

NMFS issued a draft protocol to help standardize regional fish stock assessment prioritization processes in February 

2014. Key features of the draft protocol include:

• Establishing an objective, standardized, and quantitative approach to setting regional fish stock assessment 

priorities. 

• Directing regional partners to examine all fish stocks that have never been assessed to determine which 

ones require a first time assessment.

• Directing regional partners to set a target assessment level and frequency for all fish stocks that have 

been previously assessed. 

• Defining standardized factors and a quantitative scoring system for regional partners to rank fish stock 

assessment priorities.

• Creating a database that includes information on the same factors for all fish stocks to help provide 

consistency in scoring the fish stocks.

• Providing access to scoring results and supporting data to regional partners and NMFS to help promote 

transparency and standardize regional fish stock assessment priority setting. 

• Developing a national reporting system to compile and track the results of regional prioritization decisions. 

Page 24
Page 30 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 2: Proposed Fish Stock Assessment 

Prioritization Protocol

According to NMFS’ draft protocol:

Setting a target assessment level

• allows a fishery science center to determine if it has the data needed to conduct a fish 

stock assessment at the target level and if not, make plans, if necessary, to invest in 

additional data collection.

• promotes efficient use of resources by not conducting assessments that are more 

comprehensive than they need to be. For example, some lightly fished stocks may need no 

assessment beyond monitoring of catch, while more heavily fished stocks may require a 

greater investment in data collection.

Setting a target assessment frequency

• helps identify stocks that are important to commercial or recreational fisheries and that may 

need more frequent updates to provide quick access to increased fish abundance, while 

assuring prevention of overfishing. 

• promotes efficient use of resources by not conducting assessments more frequently than is 

needed, for example, for stocks whose population is stable and that are not heavily fished.

Page 25
Page 31 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 2: Proposed Fish Stock Assessment 

Prioritization Protocol

According to NMFS, several factors are to be considered in the proposed quantitative 

scoring system to determine fish stock assessment priorities, such as:

• Fishery importance – commercial and recreational value of the fish stock to regional 

fishing communities;

• Ecosystem importance – role of the fish stock in the ecosystem and the strength of its 

interactions with other species;

• Stock status – whether the fish stock is at a sustainable level of abundance, is 

overfished and/or is experiencing overfishing; and

• Stock biology – how much change is expected to the fish stock per year, on average, 

due to natural variations (deaths and births) and as the result of fishing.

Page 26
Page 32 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 2: Proposed Fish Stock Assessment 

Prioritization Protocol – Next Steps

Key next steps for implementing the draft protocol, 

according to a senior NMFS official:

• Summarize and incorporate comments received from 

regional partners, by Summer 2014;

• Test prioritization protocol, by Fall 2014, to determine if 

adjustments are needed; and

• Begin using protocol, by Winter 2015, to develop 

regional fish stock assessments priorities.

Page 27
Page 33 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 3: Fish Stock Assessment Funding

According to a senior NMFS official, the major funding source for fish stock assessments 

and related activities is the Expand Annual Stock Assessment budget line, which

• doubled from $32 million in fiscal year 2008 to $64 million in fiscal year 2013, as 

shown in figure 6; 

• supports on-going activities such as data collection, stock assessment modeling, 

staffing, and research to improve fish stock assessments; and

• has also been used to address critical regional needs. For example, NMFS provided 

additional funds to the Southeast Fisheries Science Center in fiscal year 2010 to 

initiate a new data collection effort offshore from the South Atlantic states and to hire 

additional assessment staff and biological technicians to process sample data.

• has provided the Southeast Fisheries Science Center the most funding among all of 

the fisheries science centers between fiscal years 2010 and 2013, as shown in figure 

7. 

Page 28
Page 34 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 3: Fish Stock Assessment Funding

Figure 6: Expand Annual Stock Assessment Budget Line, Fiscal Years 2008-2013 

Page 29
Page 35 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 3: Fish Stock Assessment Funding

Figure 7: Expand Annual Stock Assessment Budget Line Funding for NMFS’ Fisheries Science Centers, Fiscal Years 2008-2013 

Page 30
Page 36 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 3: Fish Stock Assessment Funding

• Other NMFS budget lines, such as Survey and Monitoring and 

Fisheries Research and Management, support both fish stock 

assessments and related activities and fisheries activities not 

directly related to fish stock assessments. 

• According to a senior NMFS official, they do not separately track 

how much of the funds from each of these budget lines are used 

only to support stock assessments and related activities.

Page 31
Page 37 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 4: How NMFS Makes Funding 

Decisions

According to a senior NMFS official, several factors are considered in making funding decisions to 

support fish stock assessments and related activities.

• NMFS allocates funding based on past funding amounts, with adjustments based on three key 

factors:

• National fish stock assessment priorities and needs – For example, NMFS directs funding on 

an ongoing basis to support fish stock assessment data collection, modeling, and research to 

improve fish stock assessment methods.

• Critical gaps identified through program reviews – For example, in fiscal year 2013, NMFS 

conducted a review of its stock assessment data collection and management programs in 

each fisheries science center and provided funding to the centers in fiscal year 2014 to 

improve data processing.

• Regional fish stock assessment priorities – For example, in fiscal year 2010, NMFS began 

funding a reef survey to obtain data on fish stocks that NMFS anticipates will lead to an 

increase in the number of fish stock assessments conducted by the Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center over time.

Page 32
Page 38 GAO-14-794R Fish Stock Assessments

Objective 4: Draft Prioritization Protocol Could 

Inform Funding Decisions

According to the draft protocol, decisions regarding allocation of national 

resources between regions can be guided indirectly by the results of 

regional fish stock assessment prioritization. For example, our review 

found that NMFS’ draft prioritization protocol is designed to

• create a database that includes information on the same factors for all 

fish stocks to support the scoring process that may help to highlight 

regional gaps in data availability, quality, and timeliness.

• establish a new scoring system that may allow NMFS to determine the 

extent to which the regional fisheries’ science centers can meet their 

fish stock assessment needs with available resources.

• set targets for fish stock assessment frequencies and levels that may 

promote efficiencies by identifying fish stocks that have been either 

over or under assessed.

Page 33

(361505)
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, 

GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, 

go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov.

Contact:

Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.