however, there is no framework — other 

 than informal negotiations between NMFS 

 and the councils — for resolving such con- 

 flicts. (See pages 63 to 69.) 



NMFS Management Guidelines Needed 



No decisions have been made within 

 NMFS as to who will be responsible for 

 research, data collecting, and development 

 of analytical methods. There is a division of 

 opinions among NMFS staff as to whether 

 recommendations on data and methods 

 should be made by NMFS to the councils or 

 by the councils to NMFS. (See pages 69 to 

 73.) 



The preliminary management plans pre- 

 pared by NMFS were not coordinated in 

 content or format. Guidelines for presenta- 

 tion of management plans were not pro- 

 mulgated. This failure to standardize opera- 

 tions with NMFS before the initial plans 

 were written may have complicated the 

 councils' job of preparing succeeding plans 

 by failing to give them a model after which 

 to pattern their work. It may also perpetu- 

 ate regional differences within NMFS and 

 complicate the national review process. (See 

 pages 69 to 73.) 



Management Information Needed 



Much must be learned about the effec- 

 tiveness of management techniques and 

 presentation of plans. However, the most 

 pressing need for improvement is in the 

 area of developing and considering 

 economic, social, and biological data to be 

 used to modify the catch figures presented 

 in the preliminary plans. (See pages 69 to 

 74.) 



Recommendation for Management Planning 



(See pages 73 to 74.) 



Problem: There is no deadline for prepara- 

 tion of domestic fishery-management plans 

 and no priority listing of domestic fisheries 

 for which management plans should be pre- 

 pared. 



Recommendation: NMFS should prepare a 

 priority listing of domestic fisheries for which 

 management plans are needed, delineating the 

 needs and citing available data. 



16 



