Public participation in federal agency decision making has evolved over the past 60 years. The Administrative Procedure Act, enacted in 1946, created a legal basis for public participation by requiring agencies to hold public comment periods for proposed rules. In 1969, the enactment of NEPA provided the public with an opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of certain proposed federal actions. NEPA requires federal agencies to prepare a detailed environmental impact statement for any major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment, as well as an analysis of alternatives to the proposed action. The agency must take this information to the public and provide opportunities for the public to comment before a decision is reached. In 1993, Executive Order 12866 was issued to reform the regulatory process by, among other things, making the process more accessible and open to the public. Specifically, the order directs federal agencies to seek the involvement of those who are intended to benefit from and those expected to be burdened by any regulation before issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking, and to give the public an opportunity to comment on any proposed regulation. In 1976 the Magnuson-Stevens Act institutionalized regional decision making in which stakeholders play a key role. Specifically, the act established eight regional councils responsible for developing DAP and other fishery management plans: the New England, Mid-Atlantic, South Atlantic, Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean, Pacific, North Pacific, and Western Pacific councils. One of the purposes of the Magnuson-Stevens Act is to ensure that the councils prepare, monitor, and revise these plans under circumstances that will enable the states, the fishing industry, consumer and environmental organizations, and other interested parties to participate in and advise on the establishment and administration of the plans. To this end, the act provides many opportunities for stakeholder participation in developing fishery management plans. Stakeholders can attend open meetings, provide oral and written comments regarding DAP issues before the council, and serve (or be represented) on the councils or advisory committees that make recommendations to the councils. Programs developed under the Magnuson-Stevens Act must also meet the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, NEPA, and other laws governing fisheries management. NMFS prepares operational guidelines to assist the councils in developing practices and procedures, consistent with these laws, for developing, reviewing, and implementing fishery management plans. There are several different types of DAPs: IFQs allow eligible entities, such as vessel owners or fishermen, to catch a specified portion of the total catch allowed. When the assigned portions can be sold or transferred, they are called individual transferable quotas. Community quotas grant a specified portion of the total catch allowed to a community. The community then decides how to allocate the catch. Fishing cooperatives divide all or part of the available quota among fishing and/or processing entities by means of contractual agreements. Area-based quotas give an individual or group dedicated access to the fish within a specific area of the ocean. At the time of our review, NMFS had implemented nine DAP programs for fisheries under the management authority of the regional councils: the Mid- Atlantic surfclam/ocean quahog IFQ program in 1990, the South Atlantic wreckfish (snapper-grouper complex) IFQ program in 1992, the Western Alaska Community Development Quota Program in 1992, the Alaskan halibut and sablefish (black cod) IFQ program in 1995, the Whiting Conservation Cooperative in 1997, the Bering Sea pollock cooperative authorized by the American Fisheries Act in 1998, the Pacific sablefish permit stacking program in 2002, the Georges Bank cod hook sector allocation program in 2004, and the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands crab rationalization program authorized by Congress in 2004. See appendix III for descriptions of these programs. In addition, NMFS had implemented a tenth DAP program for the Atlantic bluefin tuna purse seine fishery, which the Secretary of Commerce established and now manages. Finally, at the time of our review, DAP programs were being developed for the following fisheries: Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands non-pollock groundfish (trawl catcher-processor), Gulf of Alaska groundfish, Gulf of Alaska rockfish, Gulf of Mexico red snapper, Mid-Atlantic tilefish, Georges Bank cod (gillnet), and Pacific groundfish (trawl). An effective stakeholder participation framework encompasses a set of core principles and a strategic implementation approach. However, the current practices of the fishery management councils we reviewed do not fully reflect such core principles or include an implementation strategy. While the DAP program development process provides many opportunities for stakeholder participation, stakeholders identified several areas where the councils have not addressed obstacles to participation faced by some stakeholders, particularly crew members. Our review of the participation literature and policies from leading federal agencies in stakeholder participation identified the following core principles for effective stakeholder participation, some of which may overlap when put into practice: using an open and clearly defined decision-making process; making key information readily available and understandable; actively conducting outreach and soliciting stakeholder input; involving stakeholders early and throughout the decision-making fostering responsive, interactive communication between stakeholders using formal and informal participation methods; and including all stakeholder interests. While the DAP program development process used by the fishery management councils provides many opportunities for stakeholder participation, stakeholders with whom we spoke and council members who responded to our survey identified several areas where current practices do not fully adhere to the core principles for effective participation. Using an open and clearly defined decision-making process. Adhering to this principle means that an organization makes program development processes open and accessible to all interested stakeholders, and that the organization has informed stakeholders about what roles they can play and how the organization uses stakeholder input, such as oral statements provided at council meetings, in decision making. Using a transparent process gives stakeholders clear expectations about how decisions will be made, enhancing understanding and trust in the organization’s decisions. While the councils we reviewed use an open decision-making process and inform stakeholders how they can participate, they do not always make clear how they use stakeholder input in decision making. Specifically, the councils hold open meetings where any stakeholder can provide oral or written statements on DAP agenda items. Also, each council has prepared a Statement of Organization, Practices, and Procedures that provides information on council operations and how stakeholders can participate in developing fishery management plans, such as DAP programs. Further, the councils we reviewed make information available at council meetings on how to participate. In addition, the Pacific Council has prepared a guide on how to get involved in the council process, which is available on its Web site, as well as at council meetings. Nonetheless, stakeholders told us that it takes time to understand the process. As a result, some stakeholders, particularly those who are new to the process or who are not members of a stakeholder organization, do not understand which meetings to attend and the appropriate times to submit information on DAP proposals. Finally, while all council members who responded to our survey said that they use stakeholder input in making decisions, they do not always provide explanations of how stakeholder input was used. For example, stakeholders told us that when a council votes immediately after public comment, it is not always clear that their input was considered, particularly when the council’s decision does not reflect the views expressed in public comment. In addition, council meeting minutes do not always address issues raised by stakeholders or explain how their input was used in making decisions. Making key information readily available and understandable. This core principle helps ensure that stakeholders have access to information, such as analyses of DAP proposals, and that the information is understandable to them so that they can participate in a meaningful way during the program development process. While all the councils we reviewed make key information on DAP program development readily available to stakeholders, this technical information is not always presented in an easily understandable way. Specifically, the councils make program documents, such as draft DAP planning documents and analyses, available on their Web sites and at council meetings. The councils also send these documents to those who request them. However, stakeholders told us that the documents often use technical language to present complex issues, making them difficult to understand. Stakeholders also told us that documents can be lengthy and repetitive, making them time-consuming to read. For example, the environmental impact statement for the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands crab rationalization program, required under NEPA, was more than 2,300 pages long. When key information is difficult to understand and time-consuming to read, some stakeholders said that they have difficulty becoming knowledgeable about the issues, which, according to participation experts, can limit stakeholders’ ability to participate in a meaningful way. Actively conducting outreach and soliciting stakeholder input. Adhering to this principle means that decision makers seek out those potentially affected by a decision and request input, paying particular attention to stakeholder groups that have traditionally been less involved. The councils we reviewed conduct some outreach and solicit stakeholder input. For example, the councils we reviewed place notices in the Federal Register and distribute notices to the media to announce public meetings as required by law, maintain mailing lists of people interested in receiving council-generated information, prepare and distribute newsletters to people on their mailing lists, and send representatives to fishing conferences, expositions, and forums. In addition to conducting outreach, the councils also solicit stakeholder input on the potential effects of specific DAP program alternatives by holding meetings at various locations where stakeholders can submit oral and written statements. However, at the four councils we reviewed, we found only limited efforts by the councils to provide targeted outreach to, or seek input from, stakeholders who do not typically participate in the council process, such as crew members.