Advisers urge Commission action after stock‑assessment process "broke down"

The Commission's discussion on stock assessments opened with a statutory recap from general counsel Mike Gosliner, who cited section 117 of the Marine Mammal Protection Act requiring SARs (range, minimum population, net productivity level, trend and human‑caused mortality) and update frequency (annual for strategic stocks, every three years for others). Mike said SAR content links directly to PBR calculations and fisheries interaction lists.

Lori and Commission scientists summarized how the Commission has funded R&D (satellite, UAS, close‑kin and spatial CMR) and how staff review draft SARs and track metrics such as unknown abundance or missing MSI estimates. Karen Forny and others described a practical breakdown: declining ship time, fewer agency resources, and reduced SRG responsiveness have left many abundance estimates out of date. "The way it worked in the past... is no longer there," Forny said, and several participants urged that the Commission consider a status review documenting SAR update frequency, outcomes that followed SAR updates, and creative approaches to help agencies prioritize.

Speakers suggested specific Commission actions: (1) prepare a documented review (peer‑reviewable paper plus communications materials) that quantifies how often SARs are updated and what management outcomes they produced; (2) pilot multi‑species ship surveys where those surveys deliver many abundance estimates per cruise; (3) explore incentives (or revisit previously proposed mechanisms) to reduce the practical penalty for missing SAR information; and (4) coordinate joint SRG meetings to harmonize MSI estimation across regions. No formal vote was taken; staff were asked to evaluate a scope and resource estimate for a SAR status review.